qid int64 1 74.7M | question stringlengths 12 33.8k | date stringlengths 10 10 | metadata list | response_j stringlengths 0 115k | response_k stringlengths 2 98.3k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | Climbing is the best exercise for finger and hand strength improvement, just make sure to warm up and stretch.
EDIT:
Just want to defend my answer. There are a lot of books out there you can read about climbing for training. Many of them will tell you not to waste your time cross training. The best training for climbing, is climbing.
Now if you are advanced there are other methods, but the useful ones are directly related to climbing.
The most obvious are fingerboards. Do dead hangs and pull ups in all different finger positions and different common climbing holds.
The next is H.I.T., or "Hypergravity Isolation Training", where using HIT boards you can follow a regimen to work solely on hand strength while still in a climbing format. You can train pinches crimps, and varying pocket sizes with different finger combinations.
There are also campus boards which are wooden boards with varying degrees of crimping difficulty which are ridiculously difficult and strenuous and should only be used by top tier climbers or you will injure yourself.
Now, with all these methods in mind, just climbing a wall will do wonders to improve your hand strength, whether it be top-roping, lead, or bouldering (or other).
So don't worry about cross training, just go climb a wall. When you really hit a plateau (Probably around the 5.10 going into 5.11 level or later), look into HIT. | If I already had the right to vote I would give a **+1** to [Patrick Scott](https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/217/patrick-scott)'s answer. Probably the best hand and finger exercises that help with climbing are the ones actively performed while climbing! And the key to strengthen fingers as best as possible, is to actively work on different styles of climbing. In other words, trying all kinds of imaginable grips!
Beginners worrying about injuries should just start-up with easy climbs (problems/routes) which feature big pocket-like grips and slowly advance in harder/smaller, all kinds of grips.
Most of the alternatives to "train" fingers (including various squeezing balls, dumb-bell curls, chin-ups, finger chin-ups, press-ups on fingertips) would be better a choice for recovering from injuries, trying to perform equally distributed muscle training (having in mind for example isometric exercises) to avoid various effects caused by over-training specific groups of muscles, or really targeting at being able to hold on very specific grips/holds. |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | If you haven't climbed in a while I would recommend staying away from doing fingertip pull-ups on hang boards. My assumption is that you are out of climbing shape and tendons and ligaments are easy to injure and take a long time to heal. This is coming from someone who has been climbing for around 8 years off and on and has made many mistakes, please learn from mine. Over all, take it slow when returning from a hiatus.
Available products I have used without injury are the powerball and the grippers. Both are small and can be used when you might otherwise be wasting time, like waiting in line at a store.
For further advise I would suggest reading [Training For Climbing](http://trainingforclimbing.com/). It is edited by a well known, longtime (34 years) climber on the east coast, Eric Hörst. He is also frequently featured (74 times!) in a podcast called Pod Climber, giving training advice. I found this valuable as I could listen in the car. | The most common for rock climbing are with fingerboards or campus boards.
Without those, you can perform dead hangs on anything you can hold onto, such as pullup bars. To make it a little more difficult, you can dead hang on the edges of doorways.
There are other handheld devices for grip strengthening, such as tiger claws.
Lastly, wrist curls with dumbbells will also strengthen forearms which will help when climbing. |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | The most common for rock climbing are with fingerboards or campus boards.
Without those, you can perform dead hangs on anything you can hold onto, such as pullup bars. To make it a little more difficult, you can dead hang on the edges of doorways.
There are other handheld devices for grip strengthening, such as tiger claws.
Lastly, wrist curls with dumbbells will also strengthen forearms which will help when climbing. | Also consider using the Grip Saver Plus from Metolius. It has the advantage of not only exercising your finger pressure, but the inverse. Witch from what I've heard from a physiotherapist is good thing. There were a theory behind that I don't remember well, but from what I remember the main idea is that you have to exercise the inverse of the tendon to gain strength in that tendon.
<http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/grip_saver_plus.html> |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | In addition to using a [Finger exerciser](http://www.google.co.uk/products/catalog?q=finger%20exerciser&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=9680200230582055245&sa=X&ei=gNAhT8W1J8XHswbYoMTaBw&ved=0CIcBEPMCMAA), I do the following:
* Squeezing plasticene or stress balls
* Dumb-bell curls
* Chin-ups, both on a bar, and finger chin-ups on a door frame or similar
* Press-ups on fingertips
These give finger, hand, wrist and forearm strength - worthwhile using them together. The thing I'm not so good at is toughening up the backs of my fingers. I play guitar, so my fingertips are nicely callused, but I always scuff the backs of my fingers when trying to jam into cracks. | This is a common question for beginners to ask. Climbing feels overwhelmingly strenuous when you're starting out. There are a variety of exercises that are recommended to strengthen your fingers, I can enumerate them below, but some are given in other answers. But I want to emphasize the following:
**If you have access to a climbing gym, or live somewhere with outdoor rocks accessible after work, you will get significantly better gains in your climbing ability from just climbing 2 or more times a week, consistently, that you will from pure finger-strength training. Especially if you're a beginner.**
If you've been climbing for a while and are looking to supplement your training, or if you just can't climb all that frequently you could consider the following:
Using general fitness equipment:
* Finger curls with a barbell: <http://www.nicros.com/training/articles/eastern-bloc-training-heavy-finger-rolls/>
* Deadhangs from a pullup bar. Try to keep your arms slightly bent, and hang for as long as you can. Try to build up to 4 minutes. Be careful, this can be hard on your shoulders. I personally can't do this exercise because of shoulder problems, but have friends that can.
Specialized pieces of climbing equipment:
* Metolius Rock Rings: <http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/rock_rings.html>
* a hangboard: <http://www.backcountry.com/store/search.html?mv_session_id=UmsK5WiA&q=hangboard>
With either of these you would want to do dead-hangs (like on the pullup bar), and focus on the larger holds for the first few months. **I don't know what your fitness background is, but both of these can should be considered "high risk" devices. They're designed by and for experienced rock climbers. They're targeted at people who are already climbing 5.12 sport climbs or V5 boulder problems. If you're not at a similar level of fitness, you could easily injure youself using them. Climbers regularly put their hands into positions that can only be considered orthopedic-ally unsafe when they grip tiny holds.** |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | Climbing is the best exercise for finger and hand strength improvement, just make sure to warm up and stretch.
EDIT:
Just want to defend my answer. There are a lot of books out there you can read about climbing for training. Many of them will tell you not to waste your time cross training. The best training for climbing, is climbing.
Now if you are advanced there are other methods, but the useful ones are directly related to climbing.
The most obvious are fingerboards. Do dead hangs and pull ups in all different finger positions and different common climbing holds.
The next is H.I.T., or "Hypergravity Isolation Training", where using HIT boards you can follow a regimen to work solely on hand strength while still in a climbing format. You can train pinches crimps, and varying pocket sizes with different finger combinations.
There are also campus boards which are wooden boards with varying degrees of crimping difficulty which are ridiculously difficult and strenuous and should only be used by top tier climbers or you will injure yourself.
Now, with all these methods in mind, just climbing a wall will do wonders to improve your hand strength, whether it be top-roping, lead, or bouldering (or other).
So don't worry about cross training, just go climb a wall. When you really hit a plateau (Probably around the 5.10 going into 5.11 level or later), look into HIT. | The most common for rock climbing are with fingerboards or campus boards.
Without those, you can perform dead hangs on anything you can hold onto, such as pullup bars. To make it a little more difficult, you can dead hang on the edges of doorways.
There are other handheld devices for grip strengthening, such as tiger claws.
Lastly, wrist curls with dumbbells will also strengthen forearms which will help when climbing. |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | In addition to using a [Finger exerciser](http://www.google.co.uk/products/catalog?q=finger%20exerciser&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=9680200230582055245&sa=X&ei=gNAhT8W1J8XHswbYoMTaBw&ved=0CIcBEPMCMAA), I do the following:
* Squeezing plasticene or stress balls
* Dumb-bell curls
* Chin-ups, both on a bar, and finger chin-ups on a door frame or similar
* Press-ups on fingertips
These give finger, hand, wrist and forearm strength - worthwhile using them together. The thing I'm not so good at is toughening up the backs of my fingers. I play guitar, so my fingertips are nicely callused, but I always scuff the backs of my fingers when trying to jam into cracks. | Building Grip Strength
======================
Your best chances to improve your fingertip strength is performing excercises specific to those ligaments at or near body weight.
Balls, rings, and grip springs are good for warming up, but not increasing strength.
**But** you need to be careful if you are just starting out because you can easily **injure yourself** by overtraining.
**Please do not just throw yourself into 50 pull ups a day... you will tear a tendon/ligament inside of 6 weeks.**
Great Training Book
===================
The best reference that I know of on climbing training is called "Performance Rock Climbing" and is one of the great books about improving climbing fitness. Highly recommended.
**Note: Yes it was written in the early 90's, it is still amazing.**
Training Aids
=============
Use resistance bands to **decrease** force for high rep pull up workouts.
Alternatively you can use them to **increase** force for short intense workouts.
Use the finger board to isolate the grip area to your 1st or 2nd knuckle, and reduce the number of fingers on the board for increased intensity.
Last note...
------------
READ PERFORMANCE ROCK CLIMBING
============================== |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | Building Grip Strength
======================
Your best chances to improve your fingertip strength is performing excercises specific to those ligaments at or near body weight.
Balls, rings, and grip springs are good for warming up, but not increasing strength.
**But** you need to be careful if you are just starting out because you can easily **injure yourself** by overtraining.
**Please do not just throw yourself into 50 pull ups a day... you will tear a tendon/ligament inside of 6 weeks.**
Great Training Book
===================
The best reference that I know of on climbing training is called "Performance Rock Climbing" and is one of the great books about improving climbing fitness. Highly recommended.
**Note: Yes it was written in the early 90's, it is still amazing.**
Training Aids
=============
Use resistance bands to **decrease** force for high rep pull up workouts.
Alternatively you can use them to **increase** force for short intense workouts.
Use the finger board to isolate the grip area to your 1st or 2nd knuckle, and reduce the number of fingers on the board for increased intensity.
Last note...
------------
READ PERFORMANCE ROCK CLIMBING
============================== | Also consider using the Grip Saver Plus from Metolius. It has the advantage of not only exercising your finger pressure, but the inverse. Witch from what I've heard from a physiotherapist is good thing. There were a theory behind that I don't remember well, but from what I remember the main idea is that you have to exercise the inverse of the tendon to gain strength in that tendon.
<http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/grip_saver_plus.html> |
547 | It's been a while since I went rock climbing but I'd like to get back into it. What are some hand exercises that will help with climbing? | 2012/01/26 | [
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/547",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com",
"https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/users/18/"
] | Climbing is the best exercise for finger and hand strength improvement, just make sure to warm up and stretch.
EDIT:
Just want to defend my answer. There are a lot of books out there you can read about climbing for training. Many of them will tell you not to waste your time cross training. The best training for climbing, is climbing.
Now if you are advanced there are other methods, but the useful ones are directly related to climbing.
The most obvious are fingerboards. Do dead hangs and pull ups in all different finger positions and different common climbing holds.
The next is H.I.T., or "Hypergravity Isolation Training", where using HIT boards you can follow a regimen to work solely on hand strength while still in a climbing format. You can train pinches crimps, and varying pocket sizes with different finger combinations.
There are also campus boards which are wooden boards with varying degrees of crimping difficulty which are ridiculously difficult and strenuous and should only be used by top tier climbers or you will injure yourself.
Now, with all these methods in mind, just climbing a wall will do wonders to improve your hand strength, whether it be top-roping, lead, or bouldering (or other).
So don't worry about cross training, just go climb a wall. When you really hit a plateau (Probably around the 5.10 going into 5.11 level or later), look into HIT. | Also consider using the Grip Saver Plus from Metolius. It has the advantage of not only exercising your finger pressure, but the inverse. Witch from what I've heard from a physiotherapist is good thing. There were a theory behind that I don't remember well, but from what I remember the main idea is that you have to exercise the inverse of the tendon to gain strength in that tendon.
<http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/grip_saver_plus.html> |
90,437 | I have a Media Center PC on my home network and I access the music library from my laptop through Windows Media 12 as a remote library.
I have assigned read/write permission to the library for the laptop on the PC itself, however from the laptop I am unable to remove or delete items from the library... basically there is no option to do so....
Have I missed something, or are you not allowed to delete from remote libraries?
Both machines are using Windows 7 with Media Player 12.
EDIT: I've tried Del and Backspace :)... the Delete option is not there when I right click like it is on the PC. I assume that means I'm missing an option or permission somewhere... | 2010/01/02 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/90437",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/23399/"
] | Perhaps try rebuilding Media Player's database.
1. Exit Windows Media Player.
2. Click Start, click Run, type %LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft\Media Player, and then click OK.
3. Select all the files in the folder, and then click Delete on the File menu.
Note You do not have to delete the folders that are in this folder.
4. Restart Windows Media Player.
Note Windows Media Player automatically rebuilds the database.
If this does not resolve the problem, clear the Windows Media Player database cache files. To do this, follow these steps:
1. Exit Windows Media Player.
2. Click Start, click Run, type %LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft, and then click OK.
3. Select the Media Player folder, and then click Delete on the File menu.
4. Restart Windows Media Player. | Does the user you remotely log in as have write-privileges to the folder you wish to delete?
(This is not the same as the share allowing write-permissions)
To set folder privileges, open folder properties, go to Security tab, then set permissions for the appropriate user. (Add "Everyone" and grant "Modify" permissions to grant delete permissions to all remote users). |
90,437 | I have a Media Center PC on my home network and I access the music library from my laptop through Windows Media 12 as a remote library.
I have assigned read/write permission to the library for the laptop on the PC itself, however from the laptop I am unable to remove or delete items from the library... basically there is no option to do so....
Have I missed something, or are you not allowed to delete from remote libraries?
Both machines are using Windows 7 with Media Player 12.
EDIT: I've tried Del and Backspace :)... the Delete option is not there when I right click like it is on the PC. I assume that means I'm missing an option or permission somewhere... | 2010/01/02 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/90437",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/23399/"
] | >
> Have I missed something, or are you
> not allowed to delete from remote
> libraries?
>
>
>
Not through Windows Media Player I believe, It won't work for me either (just tried). I don't think Microsoft added a remote deletion feature through Windows Media Player itself, but you could set up a Windows share that you can access with all of your media to have finer control of your library remotely. | Does the user you remotely log in as have write-privileges to the folder you wish to delete?
(This is not the same as the share allowing write-permissions)
To set folder privileges, open folder properties, go to Security tab, then set permissions for the appropriate user. (Add "Everyone" and grant "Modify" permissions to grant delete permissions to all remote users). |
90,437 | I have a Media Center PC on my home network and I access the music library from my laptop through Windows Media 12 as a remote library.
I have assigned read/write permission to the library for the laptop on the PC itself, however from the laptop I am unable to remove or delete items from the library... basically there is no option to do so....
Have I missed something, or are you not allowed to delete from remote libraries?
Both machines are using Windows 7 with Media Player 12.
EDIT: I've tried Del and Backspace :)... the Delete option is not there when I right click like it is on the PC. I assume that means I'm missing an option or permission somewhere... | 2010/01/02 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/90437",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/23399/"
] | Perhaps try rebuilding Media Player's database.
1. Exit Windows Media Player.
2. Click Start, click Run, type %LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft\Media Player, and then click OK.
3. Select all the files in the folder, and then click Delete on the File menu.
Note You do not have to delete the folders that are in this folder.
4. Restart Windows Media Player.
Note Windows Media Player automatically rebuilds the database.
If this does not resolve the problem, clear the Windows Media Player database cache files. To do this, follow these steps:
1. Exit Windows Media Player.
2. Click Start, click Run, type %LOCALAPPDATA%\Microsoft, and then click OK.
3. Select the Media Player folder, and then click Delete on the File menu.
4. Restart Windows Media Player. | >
> Have I missed something, or are you
> not allowed to delete from remote
> libraries?
>
>
>
Not through Windows Media Player I believe, It won't work for me either (just tried). I don't think Microsoft added a remote deletion feature through Windows Media Player itself, but you could set up a Windows share that you can access with all of your media to have finer control of your library remotely. |
10,788 | This came up in a talk with someone recently. Science Fiction is a genre that often prides itself of being ahead of the curve on many things, but, as best I can remember, the first same-sex relationship in SF in popular media was in *Babylon 5* in the 1990s.
What is the earliest instance of a same-sex relationship in SF (or fantasy, as well)? | 2012/02/10 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10788",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/1693/"
] | Well, if you include "Fantasy", you gotta start with Ancient Greek myths (e.g. Zephyr and Hyakinthos).
If you don't, [Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_themes_in_speculative_fiction#Proto-SF) lists
>
> True History by the Greek writer Lucian (A.D. 120–185) has been called the earliest surviving example of science fiction and the first ever "gay science fiction story".
>
>
>
Wiki Sources:
* Fredericks, S.C.: “Lucian's True History as SF”, Science Fiction Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (March 1976), pp. 49–60
* Gunn, James E. denotes True History as "Proto-Science Fiction", p.249
* Lynne Yamaguchi Fletcher The First Gay Pope and other records, p. 95, Alyson Publications: 1992 ISBN 978-1555832063
For later "real SF", Wiki lists:
>
> *An Anglo-American Alliance*, a 1906 novel by Gregory Casparian, was the first SF-themed novel to openly portray a lesbian romantic relationship.
>
>
> | I'd say "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Robert Anson Heinlein written in 1961
lots of sex and orgies and quite a bit of woman on woman action. |
10,788 | This came up in a talk with someone recently. Science Fiction is a genre that often prides itself of being ahead of the curve on many things, but, as best I can remember, the first same-sex relationship in SF in popular media was in *Babylon 5* in the 1990s.
What is the earliest instance of a same-sex relationship in SF (or fantasy, as well)? | 2012/02/10 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10788",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/1693/"
] | For SF magazines, I believe the answer is ["The World Well Lost"](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Well_Lost) by Theodore Sturgeon, published in 1953. | I'd say "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Robert Anson Heinlein written in 1961
lots of sex and orgies and quite a bit of woman on woman action. |
10,788 | This came up in a talk with someone recently. Science Fiction is a genre that often prides itself of being ahead of the curve on many things, but, as best I can remember, the first same-sex relationship in SF in popular media was in *Babylon 5* in the 1990s.
What is the earliest instance of a same-sex relationship in SF (or fantasy, as well)? | 2012/02/10 | [
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/10788",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com",
"https://scifi.stackexchange.com/users/1693/"
] | Well, if you include "Fantasy", you gotta start with Ancient Greek myths (e.g. Zephyr and Hyakinthos).
If you don't, [Wiki](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_themes_in_speculative_fiction#Proto-SF) lists
>
> True History by the Greek writer Lucian (A.D. 120–185) has been called the earliest surviving example of science fiction and the first ever "gay science fiction story".
>
>
>
Wiki Sources:
* Fredericks, S.C.: “Lucian's True History as SF”, Science Fiction Studies, Vol. 3, No. 1 (March 1976), pp. 49–60
* Gunn, James E. denotes True History as "Proto-Science Fiction", p.249
* Lynne Yamaguchi Fletcher The First Gay Pope and other records, p. 95, Alyson Publications: 1992 ISBN 978-1555832063
For later "real SF", Wiki lists:
>
> *An Anglo-American Alliance*, a 1906 novel by Gregory Casparian, was the first SF-themed novel to openly portray a lesbian romantic relationship.
>
>
> | For SF magazines, I believe the answer is ["The World Well Lost"](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Well_Lost) by Theodore Sturgeon, published in 1953. |
10,851,298 | I'm writing a couple of installation packages for a client/server application. I'm using the Wix Toolkit and as recommended each DLL is wrapped up as its own component with a unique id.
There are some common DLL's which need to be installed in both packages. Should these DLL's have the same component GUID or should they be different in each package? | 2012/06/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/10851298",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/40989/"
] | Given your reply to my comment, it would make things especially bad if both the client and server were installed on the same machine.
From [Windows Installer Components](http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa372830%28v=vs.85%29.aspx):
>
> Two components that share the same component ID are treated as multiple instances of the same component regardless of their actual content. *Only a single instance of any component is installed on a user's computer.*
>
>
>
(Emphasis added).
Plus:
>
> * Each component must be stored in a single folder.
>
>
>
The following bullet point may sound like it contradicts these:
>
> * No file, registry entry, shortcut, or other resources should ever be shipped as a member of more than one component.
>
>
>
But that's actually saying things the other way around - if you have two installers that install the same DLL to the *same* location, they *must* be part of the same component. It's the location of the file (as well as its name, and the bits inside it, version, etc) that's important.
---
Re: first line of my answer, and given what you're planning to do - if the server was installed (DLLs in server directory), and then the client was installed, the DLLs would *not* be present in the GAC, and so the client app wouldn't work. | Installed components are identified by their GUID and [keypath](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2003043/what-is-the-wix-keypath-attribute).
If both packages install the component to the *same* location, then it is important that both packages use the same GUID so that the component is reference counted correctly.
If both packages install the component to *different* locations, then they will be managed separately in any case because the keypath differs. It doesn't matter whether the GUID is the same or not in this case.
**Conclusion: you should keep the GUID the same**.
As an aside, wix encourages you to share component definitions by compiling them into a [wixlib](http://robmensching.com/blog/posts/2008/10/10/What-are-.wixlibs-and-why-would-you-use-them) and then using that wixlib in the construction of different installer packages. It's analogous to the way you would create a DLL and then use that DLL in different applications.
Your question of GUIDs doesn't even come up if you use a wixlib, because there is no point where you would be able to change them for different packages. |
17,434 | Having edits appear immediately requires a certain reputation. However, most of the edits I suggest get approved. Wouldn't it be better to have this privilege be based on edit quality rather than reputation? Something like, edits you make become public immediately after you have made 20 approved edits? | 2017/11/07 | [
"https://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/17434",
"https://meta.askubuntu.com",
"https://meta.askubuntu.com/users/711310/"
] | The reason this is based on reputation is because reputation indicates *general trust* on the network. Editing is one of the most fundamental (and dangerous) powers on this site. Upon reaching the 2000 rep threshold, you would have the ability to change *any* post on the site however you want.
Assuming you don't have any reputation cap overages, this means you would have had to spend ***ten days, and reach the maximum daily reputation on each one of those days,*** on the site before earning this privilege. In those ten days of extreme activity, it's believed that you reasonably know what a good post looks like, and how to make them.
Twenty edits is nothing. If we gave this power to anyone with only 20 edits, they can make changes that would potentially go undiscovered for a long time. Forcing people through the queue until they reach this point makes sure that they know what they're doing, and that we as a community can push editors in the right direction so that they will be able to work effectively once they hit the 2000 rep mark.
According to your own account, the four months you've been here has resulted in 31 edit suggestions from your account. 25 of those were accepted and 6 were rejected.
Just today, we've had a total of 55 edits come through the review queue. Someone can do twenty edits in a period of a few hours provided they've tried. | 20 approved edits is IMO a far to low threshold. This reputation system is designed so you have to be on the site for a while to gain rights to do that. And 20 approved edits you could achieve in under a day if you're keen for it.
And then having this right would simply give you the ability to deface questions/answers.
Sure this might get caught quick but to prevent that the system is designed as it is, having different hurdles to bring you slowly into moderation of the site. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | Self destructs do not result in smaller deadly pieces hitting people!
What the self destruct is designed to do is prevent **powered** chunks of rocket or payload getting to somewhere dangerous. If you look at any destruct videos, you will see that the explosion takes out any form of propulsion. Imagine leaving the craft to travel unguided until propellant ran out - you could hit a major city, or a nuclear reactor, or something equally as critical.
Yes, there may still be big or smaller pieces of the craft (generally much smaller, but not always) but they will come down within the safe exclusion zone near the platform or downrange.
If you end up with burning propellant and hot shards of metal over the deserted area around the launch platform, it's not a fatal problem (if we exclude manned launches...) as all spectators, civilians etc are well away from the area.
Oh, and it's entirely different to the blowing an asteroid into small chunks of asteroid concept. There we have a potential target of a hemisphere of the Earth. | In most scenarios in which a rocket flight needs to be deliberately terminated, the rocket is nearly full of fuel and oxidizer. The range-safety self-destruct system opens the propellant tanks rapidly, allowing the propellant to mix and burn while the rocket is still up in the air.
In [this video of a Proton rocket guidance failure](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeS8GvLh1Jo), it's clear by 0:15 seconds into the flight, we are not going to space today. The flight should have been terminated at that point,but apparently Proton doesn't have a self-destruct. The rocket starts to come apart, presumably due to aerodynamic stresses, around 0:25, and the body of the rocket ruptures and burns. Even so, there's a huge fireball when it hits the ground. If it could have been terminated earlier, the ground fireball would have been smaller, and closer to the launch pad (i.e. closer to the center of the area cleared of people for safety); if it hadn't exploded in the air, it would have been a bigger fireball, possibly travelling along the ground, and likely much further from the pad. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | Self destructs do not result in smaller deadly pieces hitting people!
What the self destruct is designed to do is prevent **powered** chunks of rocket or payload getting to somewhere dangerous. If you look at any destruct videos, you will see that the explosion takes out any form of propulsion. Imagine leaving the craft to travel unguided until propellant ran out - you could hit a major city, or a nuclear reactor, or something equally as critical.
Yes, there may still be big or smaller pieces of the craft (generally much smaller, but not always) but they will come down within the safe exclusion zone near the platform or downrange.
If you end up with burning propellant and hot shards of metal over the deserted area around the launch platform, it's not a fatal problem (if we exclude manned launches...) as all spectators, civilians etc are well away from the area.
Oh, and it's entirely different to the blowing an asteroid into small chunks of asteroid concept. There we have a potential target of a hemisphere of the Earth. | Self destruct is used in order to burn all the fuel in the air, preventing it from landing on the ground. The debris is not so dangerous in comparison. Most of a rocket is fuel, like most of the weight of a soda tin can is soda. Also to make sure that the event takes place over an evacuated area in a prepared launch range (although the Chinese don't seem to give that part of it high priority).
That spectacular 2011 Proton launch failure was caused by all the gyroscopes having been installed upside down, so the test of them before launch showed all correct because they were all equally wrong in agreement. Self destruct in that case would've been counter productive since the altitude was too low. The fuel would just have been spread out even more than by a crashing rocket. They shut down one of the six engines in the first stage in order to make it steer away from the launch pad and crash somewhere safe. Proton uses very toxic hypergolic fuel which adds to the problem of not self destructing. The landing ground had to be decontaminated. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | Self destructs do not result in smaller deadly pieces hitting people!
What the self destruct is designed to do is prevent **powered** chunks of rocket or payload getting to somewhere dangerous. If you look at any destruct videos, you will see that the explosion takes out any form of propulsion. Imagine leaving the craft to travel unguided until propellant ran out - you could hit a major city, or a nuclear reactor, or something equally as critical.
Yes, there may still be big or smaller pieces of the craft (generally much smaller, but not always) but they will come down within the safe exclusion zone near the platform or downrange.
If you end up with burning propellant and hot shards of metal over the deserted area around the launch platform, it's not a fatal problem (if we exclude manned launches...) as all spectators, civilians etc are well away from the area.
Oh, and it's entirely different to the blowing an asteroid into small chunks of asteroid concept. There we have a potential target of a hemisphere of the Earth. | As for whether it's implemented on real spacecraft: This [amateur video of the Challenger accident](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDVN78hdqTk) captures the destruction of the SRBs (about 1:45 in).
Three factors as to why:
When you push the button you convert one big rocket into a bunch of little pieces. Little pieces fall much more slowly.
When you blow the rocket you know where the debris is going to fall--and that's almost certainly an area that's already been cleared for the launch. Rather than on inhabited area like the [Chinese Long March 3 catastrophe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_EnrVf9u8s])
When you blow the rocket you burn up the fuel. That's a whole bunch of mass that doesn't come back down at all and the energy in that fuel is up there with small atomic weapons. That's an awful lot of destruction you prevented. (Admittedly, the fuel isn't as damaging as a nuke of the same power but it can still be devastating.) |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | Self destructs do not result in smaller deadly pieces hitting people!
What the self destruct is designed to do is prevent **powered** chunks of rocket or payload getting to somewhere dangerous. If you look at any destruct videos, you will see that the explosion takes out any form of propulsion. Imagine leaving the craft to travel unguided until propellant ran out - you could hit a major city, or a nuclear reactor, or something equally as critical.
Yes, there may still be big or smaller pieces of the craft (generally much smaller, but not always) but they will come down within the safe exclusion zone near the platform or downrange.
If you end up with burning propellant and hot shards of metal over the deserted area around the launch platform, it's not a fatal problem (if we exclude manned launches...) as all spectators, civilians etc are well away from the area.
Oh, and it's entirely different to the blowing an asteroid into small chunks of asteroid concept. There we have a potential target of a hemisphere of the Earth. | If you check for example the *Jason 3* satellite launch [webcast](http://www.spacex.com/webcast) starting around 23 minutes, you will see this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KbWRe.png)
([SpaceX webcast](http://www.spacex.com/webcast))
The *white* path shows the past trajectory of the rocket and the *blue* is a projection of ballistic path in case of total engine cutoff. The projection is always updated as can be seen in the video. For each launch there is a trajectory which the rocket should follow and then a safe flight launch corridor (not showed in there) where ships and airplanes etc. are forbidden during the launch. If there is any problem, the [Range Safety Officer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_safety) monitors the projection and in case it would get outside of the specified zone, they terminate the flight (autodestruct or just thrust termination) so the rocket or its remains have no chance of getting outside the safe zone.
That way the destruction of the rocket ensures that it does not just fly randomly still being powered by the powerful engines but it instead goes down where it is expected to not do any harm. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | Self destructs do not result in smaller deadly pieces hitting people!
What the self destruct is designed to do is prevent **powered** chunks of rocket or payload getting to somewhere dangerous. If you look at any destruct videos, you will see that the explosion takes out any form of propulsion. Imagine leaving the craft to travel unguided until propellant ran out - you could hit a major city, or a nuclear reactor, or something equally as critical.
Yes, there may still be big or smaller pieces of the craft (generally much smaller, but not always) but they will come down within the safe exclusion zone near the platform or downrange.
If you end up with burning propellant and hot shards of metal over the deserted area around the launch platform, it's not a fatal problem (if we exclude manned launches...) as all spectators, civilians etc are well away from the area.
Oh, and it's entirely different to the blowing an asteroid into small chunks of asteroid concept. There we have a potential target of a hemisphere of the Earth. | The purpose of self destruct is not necessarily to make it safer in all scenarios. It's to make it more predictable. As Rory mentioned, one of the major purposes of self destruct is to make sure there are no "powered chunks" flying in unpredictable directions. Predictability is the goal.
The self destruct is designed to be a floor on how bad things can get. We can run simulated scenarios as to how the pieces of a self-destructed vehicle behave in hundreds of scenarios, and make sure they all work out. Trying to do that with unpredictable hardware that was designed to be capable of reaching space is much harder. If it is decided that that unpredictability is unacceptable, and the predictable fallout of a self-destruct is acceptable, the button is pressed. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | As for whether it's implemented on real spacecraft: This [amateur video of the Challenger accident](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDVN78hdqTk) captures the destruction of the SRBs (about 1:45 in).
Three factors as to why:
When you push the button you convert one big rocket into a bunch of little pieces. Little pieces fall much more slowly.
When you blow the rocket you know where the debris is going to fall--and that's almost certainly an area that's already been cleared for the launch. Rather than on inhabited area like the [Chinese Long March 3 catastrophe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_EnrVf9u8s])
When you blow the rocket you burn up the fuel. That's a whole bunch of mass that doesn't come back down at all and the energy in that fuel is up there with small atomic weapons. That's an awful lot of destruction you prevented. (Admittedly, the fuel isn't as damaging as a nuke of the same power but it can still be devastating.) | In most scenarios in which a rocket flight needs to be deliberately terminated, the rocket is nearly full of fuel and oxidizer. The range-safety self-destruct system opens the propellant tanks rapidly, allowing the propellant to mix and burn while the rocket is still up in the air.
In [this video of a Proton rocket guidance failure](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeS8GvLh1Jo), it's clear by 0:15 seconds into the flight, we are not going to space today. The flight should have been terminated at that point,but apparently Proton doesn't have a self-destruct. The rocket starts to come apart, presumably due to aerodynamic stresses, around 0:25, and the body of the rocket ruptures and burns. Even so, there's a huge fireball when it hits the ground. If it could have been terminated earlier, the ground fireball would have been smaller, and closer to the launch pad (i.e. closer to the center of the area cleared of people for safety); if it hadn't exploded in the air, it would have been a bigger fireball, possibly travelling along the ground, and likely much further from the pad. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | As for whether it's implemented on real spacecraft: This [amateur video of the Challenger accident](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDVN78hdqTk) captures the destruction of the SRBs (about 1:45 in).
Three factors as to why:
When you push the button you convert one big rocket into a bunch of little pieces. Little pieces fall much more slowly.
When you blow the rocket you know where the debris is going to fall--and that's almost certainly an area that's already been cleared for the launch. Rather than on inhabited area like the [Chinese Long March 3 catastrophe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_EnrVf9u8s])
When you blow the rocket you burn up the fuel. That's a whole bunch of mass that doesn't come back down at all and the energy in that fuel is up there with small atomic weapons. That's an awful lot of destruction you prevented. (Admittedly, the fuel isn't as damaging as a nuke of the same power but it can still be devastating.) | Self destruct is used in order to burn all the fuel in the air, preventing it from landing on the ground. The debris is not so dangerous in comparison. Most of a rocket is fuel, like most of the weight of a soda tin can is soda. Also to make sure that the event takes place over an evacuated area in a prepared launch range (although the Chinese don't seem to give that part of it high priority).
That spectacular 2011 Proton launch failure was caused by all the gyroscopes having been installed upside down, so the test of them before launch showed all correct because they were all equally wrong in agreement. Self destruct in that case would've been counter productive since the altitude was too low. The fuel would just have been spread out even more than by a crashing rocket. They shut down one of the six engines in the first stage in order to make it steer away from the launch pad and crash somewhere safe. Proton uses very toxic hypergolic fuel which adds to the problem of not self destructing. The landing ground had to be decontaminated. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | As for whether it's implemented on real spacecraft: This [amateur video of the Challenger accident](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDVN78hdqTk) captures the destruction of the SRBs (about 1:45 in).
Three factors as to why:
When you push the button you convert one big rocket into a bunch of little pieces. Little pieces fall much more slowly.
When you blow the rocket you know where the debris is going to fall--and that's almost certainly an area that's already been cleared for the launch. Rather than on inhabited area like the [Chinese Long March 3 catastrophe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_EnrVf9u8s])
When you blow the rocket you burn up the fuel. That's a whole bunch of mass that doesn't come back down at all and the energy in that fuel is up there with small atomic weapons. That's an awful lot of destruction you prevented. (Admittedly, the fuel isn't as damaging as a nuke of the same power but it can still be devastating.) | If you check for example the *Jason 3* satellite launch [webcast](http://www.spacex.com/webcast) starting around 23 minutes, you will see this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KbWRe.png)
([SpaceX webcast](http://www.spacex.com/webcast))
The *white* path shows the past trajectory of the rocket and the *blue* is a projection of ballistic path in case of total engine cutoff. The projection is always updated as can be seen in the video. For each launch there is a trajectory which the rocket should follow and then a safe flight launch corridor (not showed in there) where ships and airplanes etc. are forbidden during the launch. If there is any problem, the [Range Safety Officer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_safety) monitors the projection and in case it would get outside of the specified zone, they terminate the flight (autodestruct or just thrust termination) so the rocket or its remains have no chance of getting outside the safe zone.
That way the destruction of the rocket ensures that it does not just fly randomly still being powered by the powerful engines but it instead goes down where it is expected to not do any harm. |
14,059 | On the Sci-Fi Stack Exchange there was a [question](//scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/118181/if-the-ships-self-destruct-is-such-a-great-idea-why-dont-real-navies-do-this) about implementing self-destruct on spaceships and comparing that to scuttling on naval vessels. One person in a comment said, "They do implement a self-destruct on real spacecraft. If a launch is off of intended trajectory and is a potential danger they will order the rocket to self destruct."
At first I was suspicious of this statement because it seems to me that causing parts of a rocket to go careening off in random directions is no way at all going to increase the safety of the situation. Then I found [this question here](//space.stackexchange.com/questions/923/do-all-launches-include-self-destruct-mechanisms) on this Stack Exchange, where the one and only answer verifies that most nations do implement self-destruct mechanisms and includes a recap on the situation with the Challenger disaster.
But now I am still wondering: why is it safer to have many small parts of the rocket come down separately than a fewer number of very large pieces? It's still the same mass overall and might just as well do *more* damage since it will surely fall over a larger area. This same reasoning has been used to disqualify the idea of blowing up an incoming asteroid as stated in [this article](http://www.universetoday.com/16066/bad-idea-blowing-up-asteroids-with-nuclear-missiles/) which quotes Apollo astronaut Rusty Schweickart:
>
> Another problem I can see is blowing up a large piece of rock only to
> create many smaller (but just as deadly) pieces of rock, doesn’t
> really extinguish the destructive power of an asteroid on collision
> course, in fact, it might increase it.
>
>
>
So what makes a rocket different? Are there any examples where the self-destruction of a vehicle was undoubtedly safer than the alternative? | 2016/02/11 | [
"https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14059",
"https://space.stackexchange.com",
"https://space.stackexchange.com/users/6392/"
] | As for whether it's implemented on real spacecraft: This [amateur video of the Challenger accident](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDVN78hdqTk) captures the destruction of the SRBs (about 1:45 in).
Three factors as to why:
When you push the button you convert one big rocket into a bunch of little pieces. Little pieces fall much more slowly.
When you blow the rocket you know where the debris is going to fall--and that's almost certainly an area that's already been cleared for the launch. Rather than on inhabited area like the [Chinese Long March 3 catastrophe](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_EnrVf9u8s])
When you blow the rocket you burn up the fuel. That's a whole bunch of mass that doesn't come back down at all and the energy in that fuel is up there with small atomic weapons. That's an awful lot of destruction you prevented. (Admittedly, the fuel isn't as damaging as a nuke of the same power but it can still be devastating.) | The purpose of self destruct is not necessarily to make it safer in all scenarios. It's to make it more predictable. As Rory mentioned, one of the major purposes of self destruct is to make sure there are no "powered chunks" flying in unpredictable directions. Predictability is the goal.
The self destruct is designed to be a floor on how bad things can get. We can run simulated scenarios as to how the pieces of a self-destructed vehicle behave in hundreds of scenarios, and make sure they all work out. Trying to do that with unpredictable hardware that was designed to be capable of reaching space is much harder. If it is decided that that unpredictability is unacceptable, and the predictable fallout of a self-destruct is acceptable, the button is pressed. |
47,142 | Empowered Evocation (PHB 177) reads:
>
> Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence modifier to the damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast
>
>
>
The spell Ice Storm does 2 different types of damage:
>
> A creature takes 2d8 bludgeoning damage and 4d6 cold damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one
>
>
>
I have an evoker with a 16 intelligence (+3 modifier). I cast Ice Storm as 4th level. Is my int bonus added to:
1. The total damage: 2d8 + 4d6 + 3
2. Each damage type: 2d8 + 3 and 4d6 + 3 | 2014/09/02 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/47142",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/913/"
] | Number 1 is the correct one. You only get the damage once (And in fact on a spell like, say magic missile, which it's targeting the *same* creature multiple times, you *still* only get it once. This is not exactly addressed directly in the rules, though Mike [Mearls](https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487995399899074560) has tweeted about it several times).
That said, *which* damage type it falls under is not addressed, and as such I would allow the wizard to pick. If you want to do something consistent, always applying it to the first damage instance would make sense (This seems fall well within the reading of Mearls' response). | Quoting from the [*Player's Handbook* errata](http://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/PH-Errata.pdf):
>
> **Empowered Evocation** (p. 117). The damage bonus applies to one damage roll of a spell, not multiple rolls.
>
>
>
This implies option 1. |
144,236 | I am an engineering student who loves physics but didn't quite enjoy chemistry.
**a.** When I was in high school chemistry to me was something not as inspiring as physics but in which I couldn't solve problems well. Things looked no more than the arithmetics, but I got the answers wrong.
**b.** Reading university chemistry textbooks (e.g. Oxtoby, Principles of Modern Chemistry 7E) I thought it was more of the physics behind the chemical objects and their reactions. Like quantum mechanics, electrodynamics, thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, ... they are just called differently - quantum chemistry, thermochemistry, chemical kinetics.
**c.** So I question the significance of existence of chemistry. **No offence, it's a pure curiosity.** I now believe that all fields of study must be respected, and I want to take a step to do so by understanding the true meaning of chemistry.
**Q1.** Why isn't chemistry as *science-looking* as other natural sciences?
**Q2.** Why isn't chemistry a mere branch of physics? (Why is it distinguishable?)
**Q3.** So what do chemists research?
**Q4.** Please give me any important insight about chemistry as a discipline.
Nowadays, I am very interested in chemistry, and want to learn it again at a broader viewpoint, with the proper philosophy of appreciating it. Could any chemist help.
***Edited 1**. I guess many people dislike and downvoted this post simply because I proposed a view (kind of) against chemistry. I will not delete the post - it is definitely worth leaving it as it is, because there is a nice answer and I consider that can help many other students ovecome difficulties of studying chemistry.*
***Edited 2 (My answer to this question)**.*
*Now I fully understood the need for chemistry. Sadly I couldn't post my own answer as the question was closed, so I am simply adding it here. Studying some more quantum mechanics, I realised that it provides a good basis for the theoretical understanding of facts through idealised models, but perhaps the only way it can directly contribute to the real world is through experiments and useful numerical values. That's the experimental physics aspect of chemistry that makes it meaningful.*
*Another important fact is chemistry itself being a theoretical basis for many other fields, such as molecular biology or chemical engineering. As an example, I would say that it is both practically and theoretically impossible and meaningful to think about the wave functions every single time we consider chemical processes. Various numerical measures in chemistry, such as the equilibrium constant, allow us to focus more on the essence of what's happening in other natural phenomena.*
*The final thing I want to emphasise is that contemporarily the boundaries between all of the natural sciences and even engineering have become much less explicit and most research is being conducted under interdisciplinary circumstances. I realised this after learning some proper physics and general chemistry. And general chemistry is like a collection of 100-year-old theories. The interconnections between various fields of studies in the modern sciences are so complex that I cannot, or anybody else would also be unable to, express.* | 2020/12/26 | [
"https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/questions/144236",
"https://chemistry.stackexchange.com",
"https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/users/79586/"
] | Interesting question but keep in mind that it is normal to dislike a subject. You don't *have to* like chemistry. Many people loathe physics and mathematics. The world is not affected. I am sure your experience is limited to general chemistry and Oxtoby. In statistical terms, one cannot and should not trust a single sample (=experience). However, some of your complaints and thoughts are worth commenting.
**a)** First of all beware that real life is greyish without clear cut boundaries and modern science is more so. One cannot separate the knowledge of physics and mathematics from chemistry. As someone jokingly said, "Chemistry is the physics of the outermost electron." So a "chemist" must *also* study the traditional topics studied by physics students such as quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and statistical mechanics etc. Since they wish to study the applications of thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, kinetics it is fair to call that thermochemistry (=thermodynamics applied to chemical problems not engines), quantum chemistry (quantum mechanics applied to chemical problems, molecular structure), chemical kinetics (study of the time behaviour of chemical reactions, rate laws, differential equations).
**b)** Using the same fallacious argument one may argue that engineering is an application of mathematics or it is a branch of applied mathematics. It does not have that science-looking characteristics. Why do engineering courses have differential equations? Matrices, Vectors? That is pure mathematics, Why do you need to learn programming, that is computer science, why do they need to learn English, this belongs to linguistics, why do you need to learn drawing, that is the artist's job. Again there are no clear cut boundaries in modern science and engineering.
**(c)** Regarding the "existence" of chemistry: This is a major misconception and it means you have not looked around carefully. Most of the modern and indispensable objects owe their existence due to the knowledge generated by hundreds of thousands of dedicated chemists in 300-400 years around the world. I am not counting the contributions of medieval scientists. Just look at your own laptop, how many plastic/polymeric and metallic components do you have? How did it become possible to make pure silicon chips? Organic LEDs? What about medicines in your cabinet, printer inks, what color of clothes are you wearing? How many lives the knowledge of chemistry and biology has saved? ALL modern medicines owe their existence due to the *knowledge* of chemistry and *chemical synthesis* including this corona vaccine.
Most of the early and important knowledge about atoms and elements came from people who were interested in chemistry.
Coming to the unfortunate part of Chemical Education. Yes, the early undergraduate chemical education is indeed in shambles whether it is a rich country or an economically deprived country. General chemistry teaching should be abolished from the first year courses because it is a mere collection of random facts. Gillespie, the man behind VSEPR model and a well respect famous Canadian chemist had written an interesting article 50 years ago. *Chemistry-Fact or Fiction*. He complained that chemistry does not attract the brightest students because the way early chemistry courses are taught. He emphasizes the same thing that there the emphasis is more on memorization of facts. Basically he points out a lot a flaws in the current chemical educational system He is making a general remark. But any serious chemistry teacher should read this article for the sake of inner reflection. It does not by default mean that all engineers are bright by default. There is no shortage of incompetent engineers in the world, just as there is no shortage of gifted and bright chemists. | >
> Why isn't chemistry as science-looking as other natural sciences?
>
>
>
For some reason chemistry is often taught badly (Khan Academy is probably the best place to start if you want to study the subject on your own). And there is less *interesting* information about chemistry on the internet relative to other disciplines. It's too far from the reality of a typical non-scientific person (relative to biology) and it's not as "dreamy", reality-quenstioning as let's say astrophysics/QM/etc.
>
> Why isn't chemistry a mere branch of physics? (Why is it distinguishable?)
>
>
>
If you go deep enough you'll need lot's of physics. But:
1. At a more practical level there's a huge jump in abstractions. And these high-level abstractions allow drawing useful conclusions and do useful work.
2. Physics is too low-level and you'd need immense computing powers or different calculation approaches to calculate something practical at high level.
>
> So what do chemists research?
>
>
>
An example of a task for cheminformatics (that I know of): reactivity prediction. You don't necessarily know if molecule A will react with molecule B (and how well) until you try it. And it would be beneficial to predict this better - so that bench chemists conduct fewer reactions to find the most efficient conditions (in terms of time/chemicals/environment) for synthesis of some molecule.
A more hands-on chemical example is drug discovery in pharma. You need to find a molecule which has therapeutic effect and doesn't kill you. For that chemists have to try to synthesise tens of thousands of drug-like molecules (they have to choose which ones to synthesise because there are millions or even billions of possible molecules to choose from), find the right conditions for a reaction to succeed, test whether the candidate has the right effect on a protein, has right chemical properties, whether it's not toxic, etc, etc.
This requires minituarization (running reactions at nano/micro scale) and automation to be done quickly & effectively - which is a big task on its own.
>
> give me any important insight about chemistry as a discipline
>
>
>
I probably don't know such facts about the *discipline* itself, but just to interest you more in the subject.. If you look at periodic table ([this one is great](https://ptable.com/#Properties/Electronegativity)) - elements to the left of it will be less electronegative and thus will easily let electrons go and become positively charged. Elements on the right want electrons more and thus will try to take electrons away from other atoms/molecules and become negatively charged. In your body (it's mostly water - the solvent matter for these things) you have plenty of positive (Na+, K+, Ca++) and negative (Cl-) ions. These ions (and the fact that they *are* ions and not neutral particles is important) participate in physiological processes like muscle contraction, firing of nerve impulses.
PS: I'm not a chemist (though I work closely with chemists), take everything that I say with a boulder of salt. |
25,087,323 | Is it possible to install an ipa on an iPhone (given enterprise provisioning profile) without iTunes? We are distributing an app to a non-technical audience within our company and want to simplify things as much as possible.
In the ideal case, we'd like to host the ipa on a site, and have the users browse to the site from their iPhone and install directly. Is something like this possible? | 2014/08/01 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/25087323",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/670157/"
] | You can use this service: www.testflightapp.com
It is free. You can send invitations/notifications to the desired users and a new version or update is uploaded. Also you can share a link to anyone you'd like. | If you want to distribute the ipa through your own domain and server you can use [HockeyKit](http://hockeykit.net/). It's the free and open source "little brother" of HockeyApp, a hosted service to distribute app betas.
Here is what you need to do:
* Integrate the HockeyKit SDK in your app
* Install the server component on your web server
* Add the devices you want to distribute to in your Apple developer account and generate an ad hoc distribution certificate with those devices
* Build and archive with the ad hoc profile
* Upload the ipa and the profile to your webserver |
5,800 | The classic puzzle goes something like this: "You are standing in front of a lake with a 3 gallon bucket and a 5 gallon bucket, how can you get 4 gallons of water?"
Is there an easy way to generate the triple (A,B,C) where you can get C gallons of water using buckets of size A and B? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/5800",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/1857/"
] | Not an answer but rather a good thing to look at in connection with the problem-
<http://numb3rs.wolfram.com/501/puzzle.html> | I am not a professional mathematician but a software developer given the generalization of this problem as a coding challenge. I implemented a simple site and open-sourced the code much to the help of this thread clarifying the equation so thought it would be a valuable addition.
My algorithm code can be seen at <https://github.com/metame/infinite-lake/blob/master/app/js/algorithm.js>. |
5,800 | The classic puzzle goes something like this: "You are standing in front of a lake with a 3 gallon bucket and a 5 gallon bucket, how can you get 4 gallons of water?"
Is there an easy way to generate the triple (A,B,C) where you can get C gallons of water using buckets of size A and B? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/5800",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/1857/"
] | Not an answer but rather a good thing to look at in connection with the problem-
<http://numb3rs.wolfram.com/501/puzzle.html> | [Mathloger](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_uAIS3r8Vu6JjXWvastJg/videos) has a beautiful video about this, [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Oef3MHYEC0). |
5,800 | The classic puzzle goes something like this: "You are standing in front of a lake with a 3 gallon bucket and a 5 gallon bucket, how can you get 4 gallons of water?"
Is there an easy way to generate the triple (A,B,C) where you can get C gallons of water using buckets of size A and B? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/5800",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/1857/"
] | Yes. The answer follows from Bezout's theorem which says that given integers A,B and C, C can be written as XA+YB if and only if C is a multiple of the highest common factor of A and B. Euclid's algorithm tells you how to compute X and Y.
It is not too hard to see that the only volumes you can get are ones of the that are integer linear combinations of A and B and you can get every positive volume that arises in this way (as long as you have a large enough additional container to store it all). | I am not a professional mathematician but a software developer given the generalization of this problem as a coding challenge. I implemented a simple site and open-sourced the code much to the help of this thread clarifying the equation so thought it would be a valuable addition.
My algorithm code can be seen at <https://github.com/metame/infinite-lake/blob/master/app/js/algorithm.js>. |
5,800 | The classic puzzle goes something like this: "You are standing in front of a lake with a 3 gallon bucket and a 5 gallon bucket, how can you get 4 gallons of water?"
Is there an easy way to generate the triple (A,B,C) where you can get C gallons of water using buckets of size A and B? | 2009/11/17 | [
"https://mathoverflow.net/questions/5800",
"https://mathoverflow.net",
"https://mathoverflow.net/users/1857/"
] | Yes. The answer follows from Bezout's theorem which says that given integers A,B and C, C can be written as XA+YB if and only if C is a multiple of the highest common factor of A and B. Euclid's algorithm tells you how to compute X and Y.
It is not too hard to see that the only volumes you can get are ones of the that are integer linear combinations of A and B and you can get every positive volume that arises in this way (as long as you have a large enough additional container to store it all). | [Mathloger](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1_uAIS3r8Vu6JjXWvastJg/videos) has a beautiful video about this, [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Oef3MHYEC0). |
17,432,749 | I am working on a simple C# windows application, I've some standard reports and their parameters, along with configuration settings that remain constant in the application. So, I'm thinking which is the better approach to store these values.
If it is database design I can imagine through below tables
>
> **Report:** Id, Name
>
>
> **ReportParameters:** Id, Name, ReportId
>
>
> **Configuration**: Id, Name, Value, Environment
>
>
>
Report contains 5 records, and each report contains max 3 parameters and configuration contains 5 records for each environment.
For these kind of scenarios, would it be advisable to store in database or in-memory variables.
**Edit**
This windows application will be used every quarter, so IMO database + cache doesn't seem to be good idea. | 2013/07/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/17432749",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1606128/"
] | I would probably do something via appSettings then since you aren't storing too much. You could also create a custom object, serialize it and then deserialize it when you need it. There are lots of different options but those are probably the first ones I would consider in your case. | Unless you are already using a database, I'd plan on just serializing the settings. If you are using a database, this might make sense, particularly if the settings change often. That makes it easy to just poke the database and change the settings. Similarly if you serialize in XML.
Keeping them in the source code should be a last resort, since any report settings are likely to change or be added. You shouldn't have to recompile the code to add a new report. |
17,432,749 | I am working on a simple C# windows application, I've some standard reports and their parameters, along with configuration settings that remain constant in the application. So, I'm thinking which is the better approach to store these values.
If it is database design I can imagine through below tables
>
> **Report:** Id, Name
>
>
> **ReportParameters:** Id, Name, ReportId
>
>
> **Configuration**: Id, Name, Value, Environment
>
>
>
Report contains 5 records, and each report contains max 3 parameters and configuration contains 5 records for each environment.
For these kind of scenarios, would it be advisable to store in database or in-memory variables.
**Edit**
This windows application will be used every quarter, so IMO database + cache doesn't seem to be good idea. | 2013/07/02 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/17432749",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1606128/"
] | If it's in-memory, then all of your configuration will be lost every time you close the program. Based on:
>
> Report contains 5 records, and each report contains max 3 parameters
> and configuration contains 5 records for each environment.
>
>
>
it seems like a very minimal number of settings. I would serialize some object to an XML file. | Unless you are already using a database, I'd plan on just serializing the settings. If you are using a database, this might make sense, particularly if the settings change often. That makes it easy to just poke the database and change the settings. Similarly if you serialize in XML.
Keeping them in the source code should be a last resort, since any report settings are likely to change or be added. You shouldn't have to recompile the code to add a new report. |
36,482 | Farmer Hobenstein has 24 cows, all of which never move at all. They are arranged on four sides of his rectangular house, 6 on each side, and there are windows through which he can watch them. He never goes out there, though.
One night the notorious Bellatrix Lestrange stole 12 of his cows. But still, Hobenstein could still see 6 cows on all four sides for ages.
**How?** | 2016/06/22 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/36482",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/25524/"
] | Bellatrix moves six of the remaining cows to the northeast field, and moves the other six to the southwest field.
The next morning, Farmer Hobenstein stands in the northwest corner of his house. He looks through the north window and sees six cows. He looks through the west window and sees six cows.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VZdkb.png)
He moves to the southeast corner of his house. He looks through the east window and sees six cows. He looks through the south window and sees six cows.[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/en4Ny.png) | >
> Bellatrix Lestrange steals 3 cows from each side. If Farmer Hobenstein has trouble counting then he counts the three cows he can see on each side twice by mistake. So he can still see 24 cows even though there are only 12
>
>
> |
36,482 | Farmer Hobenstein has 24 cows, all of which never move at all. They are arranged on four sides of his rectangular house, 6 on each side, and there are windows through which he can watch them. He never goes out there, though.
One night the notorious Bellatrix Lestrange stole 12 of his cows. But still, Hobenstein could still see 6 cows on all four sides for ages.
**How?** | 2016/06/22 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/36482",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/25524/"
] | The thief could, amongst other schemes
>
> line three cows on each diagonal of his rectangular house, so the farmer double counts them.
>
>
> | >
> Bellatrix Lestrange steals 3 cows from each side. If Farmer Hobenstein has trouble counting then he counts the three cows he can see on each side twice by mistake. So he can still see 24 cows even though there are only 12
>
>
> |
36,482 | Farmer Hobenstein has 24 cows, all of which never move at all. They are arranged on four sides of his rectangular house, 6 on each side, and there are windows through which he can watch them. He never goes out there, though.
One night the notorious Bellatrix Lestrange stole 12 of his cows. But still, Hobenstein could still see 6 cows on all four sides for ages.
**How?** | 2016/06/22 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/36482",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/25524/"
] | Bellatrix moves six of the remaining cows to the northeast field, and moves the other six to the southwest field.
The next morning, Farmer Hobenstein stands in the northwest corner of his house. He looks through the north window and sees six cows. He looks through the west window and sees six cows.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VZdkb.png)
He moves to the southeast corner of his house. He looks through the east window and sees six cows. He looks through the south window and sees six cows.[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/en4Ny.png) | The thief could, amongst other schemes
>
> line three cows on each diagonal of his rectangular house, so the farmer double counts them.
>
>
> |
3,900,308 | There are some breakpoints in my project that for some reason can not be turned off or deleted. How can I delete these? I heard that they can be deleted by deleting a file with the extension .dsk, but I can't find that file. Where is it? | 2010/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3900308",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/404020/"
] | There are 4 solutions i have provided which you can try.
Sometimes all you need to do is click and drag the breakpoint one by one in your project and drag it off the screen. If that doesn't work try these options. At least one will definitely work.
**Solution 1:**
Or the more better solution would be to turn the breakpoints off. There is a button on the top bar where the build and run button is located; on the left of it, there is a breakpoints button an image of an arrow pointing to the right is on the button. thats the button you want to click to activate/deactivate breakpoints in your project.
**EDIT: Further explanation**
**Solution 2:**
If you want to delete some break points that you dont need you locate the breakpoints in your project and then click and hold on the specific breakpoint you want to get rid off, then you drag it off the sidebar; you will see your cursor change to a scrunched up paper ball, to let you know that if you let go then your object that is being held by the mouse (in this case a breakpoint) will be deleted.
**Solution 3:**
Another way of deleting a break point is by right clicking on the specific breakpoint you want deleted and click on the menu option: remove breakpoint.
**Solution 4:**
If you want access to the place where all break points are stored, you right click on the breakpoint in the sidebar, click on 'Reveal in Break points':
Then a screen appears which displays all break points, and from here you ahve full control over the brakpoints, where you can select the break point and delete it from the file.
I believe this is what you wanted.
**PK** | I had a seemingly "invisible" breakpoint that couldn't be removed. The line where the break occurred was missing the usual pointy blue visual indication of an active or disabled breakpoint, so there was nothing there to drag out or right click in the usual way. This sounds like what has happend to z-buffer.
It turns out the breakpoint was set in commented code that had been collapsed in the editor, but was breaking the flow at an unrelated and uncommented line further down. The commented code had multiple /\* \*/ blocks embedded within one another, and I think this may have confused Xcode into setting the breakpoint at different line than the one marked on screen. Xcode 4.1 would sometimes freeze when debugging with the strange breakpoint.
I was able to gather from this [post](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1665744/xcode-remove-all-breakpoints) that CMD(⌘)+ALT+B or CMD(⌘)+6 in Xcode 4+ will bring up all the breakpoints in the project for easy removal. This helped me to quickly find and disable these "invisible" breakpoints. |
3,900,308 | There are some breakpoints in my project that for some reason can not be turned off or deleted. How can I delete these? I heard that they can be deleted by deleting a file with the extension .dsk, but I can't find that file. Where is it? | 2010/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3900308",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/404020/"
] | There are 4 solutions i have provided which you can try.
Sometimes all you need to do is click and drag the breakpoint one by one in your project and drag it off the screen. If that doesn't work try these options. At least one will definitely work.
**Solution 1:**
Or the more better solution would be to turn the breakpoints off. There is a button on the top bar where the build and run button is located; on the left of it, there is a breakpoints button an image of an arrow pointing to the right is on the button. thats the button you want to click to activate/deactivate breakpoints in your project.
**EDIT: Further explanation**
**Solution 2:**
If you want to delete some break points that you dont need you locate the breakpoints in your project and then click and hold on the specific breakpoint you want to get rid off, then you drag it off the sidebar; you will see your cursor change to a scrunched up paper ball, to let you know that if you let go then your object that is being held by the mouse (in this case a breakpoint) will be deleted.
**Solution 3:**
Another way of deleting a break point is by right clicking on the specific breakpoint you want deleted and click on the menu option: remove breakpoint.
**Solution 4:**
If you want access to the place where all break points are stored, you right click on the breakpoint in the sidebar, click on 'Reveal in Break points':
Then a screen appears which displays all break points, and from here you ahve full control over the brakpoints, where you can select the break point and delete it from the file.
I believe this is what you wanted.
**PK** | Using a developer preview version of Xcode 5, I had some bad breakpoints that could not be deleted in the breakpoints window. Going into the .xcodeproj and removing the Breakpoints.xcbkptlist (and a Breakpoint\_v2.xcbkptlist) files in xcshareddata/xcdebugger and xcuserdata/me.xcuserdatad/xcdebugger directory deleted all breakpoints for me. |
3,900,308 | There are some breakpoints in my project that for some reason can not be turned off or deleted. How can I delete these? I heard that they can be deleted by deleting a file with the extension .dsk, but I can't find that file. Where is it? | 2010/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3900308",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/404020/"
] | There are 4 solutions i have provided which you can try.
Sometimes all you need to do is click and drag the breakpoint one by one in your project and drag it off the screen. If that doesn't work try these options. At least one will definitely work.
**Solution 1:**
Or the more better solution would be to turn the breakpoints off. There is a button on the top bar where the build and run button is located; on the left of it, there is a breakpoints button an image of an arrow pointing to the right is on the button. thats the button you want to click to activate/deactivate breakpoints in your project.
**EDIT: Further explanation**
**Solution 2:**
If you want to delete some break points that you dont need you locate the breakpoints in your project and then click and hold on the specific breakpoint you want to get rid off, then you drag it off the sidebar; you will see your cursor change to a scrunched up paper ball, to let you know that if you let go then your object that is being held by the mouse (in this case a breakpoint) will be deleted.
**Solution 3:**
Another way of deleting a break point is by right clicking on the specific breakpoint you want deleted and click on the menu option: remove breakpoint.
**Solution 4:**
If you want access to the place where all break points are stored, you right click on the breakpoint in the sidebar, click on 'Reveal in Break points':
Then a screen appears which displays all break points, and from here you ahve full control over the brakpoints, where you can select the break point and delete it from the file.
I believe this is what you wanted.
**PK** | For Xcode 4 & 5: just click the "breakpoints" tab on the left side, select all breakpoints and delete. |
3,900,308 | There are some breakpoints in my project that for some reason can not be turned off or deleted. How can I delete these? I heard that they can be deleted by deleting a file with the extension .dsk, but I can't find that file. Where is it? | 2010/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3900308",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/404020/"
] | I had a seemingly "invisible" breakpoint that couldn't be removed. The line where the break occurred was missing the usual pointy blue visual indication of an active or disabled breakpoint, so there was nothing there to drag out or right click in the usual way. This sounds like what has happend to z-buffer.
It turns out the breakpoint was set in commented code that had been collapsed in the editor, but was breaking the flow at an unrelated and uncommented line further down. The commented code had multiple /\* \*/ blocks embedded within one another, and I think this may have confused Xcode into setting the breakpoint at different line than the one marked on screen. Xcode 4.1 would sometimes freeze when debugging with the strange breakpoint.
I was able to gather from this [post](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1665744/xcode-remove-all-breakpoints) that CMD(⌘)+ALT+B or CMD(⌘)+6 in Xcode 4+ will bring up all the breakpoints in the project for easy removal. This helped me to quickly find and disable these "invisible" breakpoints. | For Xcode 4 & 5: just click the "breakpoints" tab on the left side, select all breakpoints and delete. |
3,900,308 | There are some breakpoints in my project that for some reason can not be turned off or deleted. How can I delete these? I heard that they can be deleted by deleting a file with the extension .dsk, but I can't find that file. Where is it? | 2010/10/10 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/3900308",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/404020/"
] | Using a developer preview version of Xcode 5, I had some bad breakpoints that could not be deleted in the breakpoints window. Going into the .xcodeproj and removing the Breakpoints.xcbkptlist (and a Breakpoint\_v2.xcbkptlist) files in xcshareddata/xcdebugger and xcuserdata/me.xcuserdatad/xcdebugger directory deleted all breakpoints for me. | For Xcode 4 & 5: just click the "breakpoints" tab on the left side, select all breakpoints and delete. |
4,656 | The original bar and chain that came with the chainsaw had 38cm length, 0.325" pitch, and 1.5mm gauge.
Can I change them with a 45cm length, 0.325" pitch, and **1.3mm** gauge?
I know the length is within the limits of the chainsaw, but I don't if gauge can be different | 2016/09/16 | [
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/4656",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com",
"https://woodworking.stackexchange.com/users/2711/"
] | Without know the model # I can not give you the exact answer, but this can get you as close as you can with the said info.
This shows all compatible sizes for Husqvarna chainsaws
<https://www.baileysonline.com/Pages/Chainsaw-Chain-Cross-Reference-Chart/> | It depends on chainsaw model. On some model of Husqvarna chainsaw, you can change the bar length and chain setting(pitch/gauge), on some model you cannot.
But in most cases, you can use a smaller or larger bar than the stock bar size. Check the manual or product description in online. |
123,541 | The world economy — and therefore also the world of finance — is currently facing yet another existential crisis. What solution do the best and most risk averse investors, like Warren Buffett, use to ensure that their stakes in other public companies will be held safely, even if the brokerages companies won't exist tomorrow? | 2020/04/06 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/123541",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/96811/"
] | The brokerage company doesn't own the stock. The brokerage facilitates the buying and selling of stock.
The shares you buy in any brokerage are your shares. The brokerage can't just steal people's shares because they're going broke.
The more interesting question in this case would be where does he (or where do they) keep their cash. The cash actually might be at risk. | Public companies use [stock transfer agents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_transfer_agent) to keep track of who owns their shares.
**Direct registration**
Under direct registration, when you buy a stock, the stock is not held in your broker's name. It is held in your name and your name appears on the stock transfer agent's list. In this scenario, there is no "custody" as the stock is held directly under the investor's name. The brokerage firm could disappear tomorrow and the investor would still have his stock intact.
**Street name**
Alternatively, the investor's securities could be held in someone else's name (a "custodian" or "nominee". See: [street name securities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_name_securities)). As you alluded to in your question, this scenario involves risk. The risk is mitigated to some extent by SEC regulations (e.g. requiring brokerage firms to segregate client assets from firm assets) and compliance monitoring by FINRA. For small investors, the [Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securities_Investor_Protection_Corporation) provides the insurance against loss should the nominee firm collapse.
Conclusion: If the shares owned by Berkshire Hathaway are held in its own name, there is no risk of loss from the collapse of any nominee firms. |
123,541 | The world economy — and therefore also the world of finance — is currently facing yet another existential crisis. What solution do the best and most risk averse investors, like Warren Buffett, use to ensure that their stakes in other public companies will be held safely, even if the brokerages companies won't exist tomorrow? | 2020/04/06 | [
"https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/123541",
"https://money.stackexchange.com",
"https://money.stackexchange.com/users/96811/"
] | Stock issue, transfer, and holding is a system of accounting. A stock-transfer-agent keeps an accounting of a company's stock. If the transferred stock is not held in the investor's name then there is a second accounting by a stock-broker who is holding the stock in their name but accounted on their books to their customers.
The real risk is the company invested-in itself. A company with a loss of revenue and a large amount of debt is at risk of bankruptcy. Then in a re-organization the shareholders are often wiped out with the bondholders becoming the new shareholders. | Public companies use [stock transfer agents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_transfer_agent) to keep track of who owns their shares.
**Direct registration**
Under direct registration, when you buy a stock, the stock is not held in your broker's name. It is held in your name and your name appears on the stock transfer agent's list. In this scenario, there is no "custody" as the stock is held directly under the investor's name. The brokerage firm could disappear tomorrow and the investor would still have his stock intact.
**Street name**
Alternatively, the investor's securities could be held in someone else's name (a "custodian" or "nominee". See: [street name securities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_name_securities)). As you alluded to in your question, this scenario involves risk. The risk is mitigated to some extent by SEC regulations (e.g. requiring brokerage firms to segregate client assets from firm assets) and compliance monitoring by FINRA. For small investors, the [Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securities_Investor_Protection_Corporation) provides the insurance against loss should the nominee firm collapse.
Conclusion: If the shares owned by Berkshire Hathaway are held in its own name, there is no risk of loss from the collapse of any nominee firms. |
185,324 | I had finished my animation, rendered the whole thing overnight, and when I came to my desktop in the morning, it was finished. (I am an amateur at this, so don't judge) The animation has rendered, now how do I watch it?
I would like an up-to-date answer to my question, and please explain. I am using the latest Blender (At least when I made this question) version 2.8. I've tried to press the folder button, but that just said "Open Image", and then there was "New Image", which I didn't want to have to render it again. Maybe I did it wrong. I did Render, render animation. Or Ctrl + F12 for short. Please help, I am new to this! | 2020/07/05 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/185324",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/90830/"
] | There are two ways to render an animation in blender:
1. Render as Video
2. Render as Image Sequence
My suggestion is to use the second method (Render as Image Sequence) for having a list of benefits:
* you'll have all the single frames not compresses (best settings are saving single frames as PNG or any lossless image type), so if you need to edit something later on you can do it
* you'll decode the video after, so you can always change the compression and format (just use ffmpeg to get quicker and best results) (if you just render the animation as video in Blender and if you select a compression too low, you cannot fix that later)
* if your computer crash you'll have the single frames (if it crashes while rendering the video, I fear you'll get a corrupted video in the best scenario, you'll get nothing in the worst scenario)
Your file (or files) are in the folder you specified as OUTPUT (in the output properties).
It can be also in the TMP folder. In this case you need to find out where the TMP folder is on your pc by typing %tmp% in your windows search bar
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/kcn3u.png) | You can open your movie or image sequence in Blender itself: Create 2 *Video Sequencer* windows, keep one as a *Sequencer*, switch the second one as *Preview*, in the *Sequencer* press `Shift``A` and load your movie: *Image/Sequence* if it's a series of images (as explained Sanbaldo you can render a series of images instead of a movie), or *Movie* if it's a movie. Keep in mind that the movie or images won't be saved inside the blend file itself, it will always catch it in the folder where it is in your computer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7p3Jm.jpg) |
23,164 | Many references state that pumice is formed by gases in lava, but I have yet to find a reference of which gases they are. If a piece of pumice floats, then conceivably it still contains the original gases from the magma, right?
Breaking the pumice would release the gas trapped in the vesicles.
According to [https://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/Natural\_Disasters/volcan&magma.htm](https://www.tulane.edu/%7Esanelson/Natural_Disasters/volcan&magma.htm), the gases in magma are
* Mostly H2O (water vapor) & some CO2 (carbon dioxide)
* Minor amounts of Sulfur, Chlorine, and Fluorine gases
But is this true for pumice? If it's mostly water vapor in the gas, then when it cools, the pumice holes would contain liquid water, albeit small amounts compared to the size of the vesicles.
Otherwise, does pumice typically have other gases?
**Edit**: Here's some background for this question. My 7yo son asked me where the bubbles in pumice came from, when I showed him that this "rock" can float. Google didn't give a good answer, so after he went to bed I started searching... Kids ask the best questions! | 2021/11/17 | [
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/questions/23164",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com",
"https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/users/24877/"
] | The work of Formenti et al. in [*Earth and Planetary Science Letters* 214 (2003) 561](https://www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp/people/ichihara/vp2007plan/Formenti%20and%20Druitt%202003%20EPSL.pdf) disagrees with the idea that pumice can never retain original gases (emphasis added):
>
> Our observations show that dense blocks derived from lava domes are commonly not able to retain gas because essentially all the vesicles are interconnected, as also found by Le Pennec et al. [18] in an electrical conductivity study of samples of Merapi lava dome. On the other hand, typically a few volume percent of vesicles in pumices from fountain-collapse pyroclastic flows at Soufrière Hills and Lascar are isolated, showing that **gas can be retained in isolated vesicles of pumices even after cooling and deposition**.
>
>
>
Unfortunately, they don't have any information on what the contents of the vesicles would be. It was [discovered in the 1920s](http://earth.geology.yale.edu/%7Eajs/1938-A/311.pdf) that pumice did not retain sufficient original gases to be useful as a sample of volcanic gas. Scientists decided it was easier to catch the gases emerging from the volcano than to try to sample the highly contaminated contents of crushed pumice. Even with modern techniques, the difficulty of determining the contents of isolated vesicles is simply too high, since they presumably contain the same gases as emitted from volcanic vents. | Just to add to the other answers,
>
> If it's mostly water vapor in the gas, then when it cools, the pumice
> holes would contain liquid water, **albeit small amounts compared to the
> size of the vesicles.**
>
>
>
This is actually a very important point.
When the magma erupted, the vesicle contained very low density H2O gas.
Assuming the vesicle remains closed somehow and isolated from the outside, cooling down of the vesicle would not necessarily lead to the formation of liquid water. The total amount of molecules inside the vesicle if fixed, and the drop in temperature leads to a very low inside pressure. The total density remains the same, which is much lower than the density of liquid water. Therefore, pumice floats. |
11,231,491 | Is it possible to use Flatiron's resourcefull (ODM) in express.js? | 2012/06/27 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/11231491",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1309847/"
] | **Yes.**
You'll want to use express's resource router project, <https://github.com/visionmedia/express-resource/>. This will require a little bit of setup since you'll need to map each resourceful method call.
I would recommend looking at Flatiron's resource router <https://github.com/flatiron/restful>, since it requires zero-configuration for working with Resourceful resources. | There's nothing in Resourceful that is specific to any other package; the readme at <https://github.com/flatiron/resourceful> does a good job of showing how you would use this package in *any* project (not just Express-based ones). |
27,517 | I have an issue with my 2nd year blueberry bush. I purchased this "Blue Jay" (I think) variety of blueberry bush two years ago and it has fruited satisfactorily both years. However, it's now sending up much larger-leaved "suckers". Am I looking at a possible grafted variety? Should I cut back the suckers? (They all appear to derive from under the soil). The suckers aren't flowering but I wouldn't expect them to anyways since they came up after the smaller leaved bush finished its fruits. I'm new to Vaccinium culture, would love some advice.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ESU2v.jpg)
Update: it seems that you were correct. I dug up the bush and found an entangled root system of 2 clearly different species. I didn't think blueberries were grafted but these shoots did have the same aggressive nature as suckers that appear from below ground with other grafted plants. After careful separation, I now have a perfectly happy blueberry bush and what I believe to be some sort of Salix. Thanks everyone!
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jpPUW.jpg) | 2016/07/29 | [
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/questions/27517",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com",
"https://gardening.stackexchange.com/users/14207/"
] | Your location would be helpful here, but it appears that whatever it was is after insects, etc, that are living in the decomposing mulch layer (not plants). If it's not rodents, it could be possums, coons, etc rooting through. It looks to me more like something rooting, rather than a rodent tunneling. The best way to stop this (in my experience), is to catch them in a live trap, and transport them to another location. I wouldn't worry about it so long as they aren't doing any damage to your plants. Also, it looks like pretty much all the turned up layer was decomposing mulch, so that shouldn't harm plant roots growing in the soil below. | This all depends on location of course. This looks like squirrel gopher. Larger than vole and shrews. Usually the preferred food are grubs. Occasionally they will eat roots, bulbs and tender plants as well. If you don't have a big community of grubs. Echnerwal's opinion to 'wait and see' is wise.
J. Musser's live trap thingy is good...I like it but I have to say, when you remove a critter it only opens up a new niche in your environment for a few others to come and fight over it or fill it. Tide goes out tide comes in. Killing these survivalist species is just silly.
It has been proven that once an environment is compromised with poison and traps somehow that is translated into larger litters, more babies per pregnancy. The trick is to design and expect your garden to fit within the existing environment...a harmony.
These underground animals are wonderful in my opinion. I don't mind 'feeding' them at all. What they do for the aeration of your soil, top dressing of lawns and controlling other insects that without that control will become far worse on your plants than loosing a few to these wonderful, FREE, laborers. A little raking and a few plants that die from root damage or root exposure or eaten is a small price to pay.
There are Rodent Killing Killers Sites I've been harassing, mostly cause I inserted some common sense and the killers themselves became incensed and harassed me! The internet is a wonderful thing...grins!! I have never ever found it necessary to kill a mammal, even mice. Heck, most insects are welcome as they also control harmony. Remember, when you kill something you are opening a niche for more to come into your environment. If you can learn about your new 'family' members you stand a chance to figure out a way to create harmony. Humans are so arrogant. We think if we kill a little shrew that will 'save' our gardens and make sure we are in charge. Ha ha. If we don't understand the system there is no way we are going to make things better by killing |
389,453 | Is there an Google Chrome extension that adds a minimap next to the scroll bar like Sublime Text 2?
 | 2012/02/13 | [
"https://superuser.com/questions/389453",
"https://superuser.com",
"https://superuser.com/users/16659/"
] | This might be worth looking into.
<https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/minimap/opcbonhbaamhjmlbcedangecgjjiollh> | eLife Lens has a [Document Map](http://lens.elifesciences.org/about/#figures/paragraph_15/figure_2) in HTML5. |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | I can make
>
> **54÷6=9** or **54÷9=6**
>
>
>
Wait... How?
>
> You can overlap 1 and 7, and then rotate it 180 degrees to make 4.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZTbYm.png)
>
>
> | Rendering the equation as
A / B = C
we can make some observations:
1. Solutions for B and C are interchangeable. That is, if there is a solution B=x and C=y then B=y and C=x is also a solution.
2. A has exactly 2 digits.
* If A had 3 digits then we would be left with 1-digit numbers for the divisors (B and C), which prevents the product (A) from being >= 100.
* If A had 1 digit then either B or C would be greater than A which would not work.
3. Consequently, B and C have 3 digits between them, sinnce we have exactly 5 digits to work with and A has 2 of them.
4. Neither B nor C can be exactly 9. If either was 9, then the sum of digits of A would have to be a multiple of 9, and there is no combination of 2 of the remaining digits that meet this requirement.
5. Neither B nor C can be exactly 1. If either was 1, then the other would have to be equal to A. But we can't re-use digits, so this is impossible.
6. Neither B nor C can be exactly 5. If either was 5, then A would need to end in zero or 5. But we can't re-use 5 and zero is not available. (Similarly, neither can end in 5.)
7. Neither B nor C can be exactly 6. If either was 6, then A would need to end with an even digit. But we have no even digits other than 6. (Similarly, neither can end in 6.)
8. A can not end in 5 or 6, for the same reasons given in the previous two observations.
9. Since either B or C must be a single digit (from (3)), and neither can be exactly 1, 5, 6, or 9, then one of them must be 7. Let's use B=7 (since solutions for B and C are symmetrical)
10. we are now down to the following possibilities for A:
17,19,51,57,59,61,67,69,71,79,91,97,99 - of which only 91 is a multiple of 7. But
91 / 7 = 13, not 65 or 56.
So I conclude there is no solution "using all the *numbers* exactly once". |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | I can make
>
> **54÷6=9** or **54÷9=6**
>
>
>
Wait... How?
>
> You can overlap 1 and 7, and then rotate it 180 degrees to make 4.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZTbYm.png)
>
>
> | It isn't the most creative of solutions, but there are contexts in which
>
> 97/15 = 6, for example, Integer Arithmetic
>
>
> |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | I can make
>
> **54÷6=9** or **54÷9=6**
>
>
>
Wait... How?
>
> You can overlap 1 and 7, and then rotate it 180 degrees to make 4.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZTbYm.png)
>
>
> | If you permit answers in fields other than the reals, there are rather a lot of solutions\*! For example, in the numbers mod 1697, 1 / 5 = 679, because 679 \* 5 = 1697 \* 2 + 1 ≡ 1 mod 1697.
\* The exact number of solutions depends on some choices you must make about which, if any, of the question marks you allow to be larger than the modulus you are working in. If none are required to be normalized in this way, there are 1910 solutions, but even if you require all three question marks to be "small" there are still 1044 solutions. |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | Rendering the equation as
A / B = C
we can make some observations:
1. Solutions for B and C are interchangeable. That is, if there is a solution B=x and C=y then B=y and C=x is also a solution.
2. A has exactly 2 digits.
* If A had 3 digits then we would be left with 1-digit numbers for the divisors (B and C), which prevents the product (A) from being >= 100.
* If A had 1 digit then either B or C would be greater than A which would not work.
3. Consequently, B and C have 3 digits between them, sinnce we have exactly 5 digits to work with and A has 2 of them.
4. Neither B nor C can be exactly 9. If either was 9, then the sum of digits of A would have to be a multiple of 9, and there is no combination of 2 of the remaining digits that meet this requirement.
5. Neither B nor C can be exactly 1. If either was 1, then the other would have to be equal to A. But we can't re-use digits, so this is impossible.
6. Neither B nor C can be exactly 5. If either was 5, then A would need to end in zero or 5. But we can't re-use 5 and zero is not available. (Similarly, neither can end in 5.)
7. Neither B nor C can be exactly 6. If either was 6, then A would need to end with an even digit. But we have no even digits other than 6. (Similarly, neither can end in 6.)
8. A can not end in 5 or 6, for the same reasons given in the previous two observations.
9. Since either B or C must be a single digit (from (3)), and neither can be exactly 1, 5, 6, or 9, then one of them must be 7. Let's use B=7 (since solutions for B and C are symmetrical)
10. we are now down to the following possibilities for A:
17,19,51,57,59,61,67,69,71,79,91,97,99 - of which only 91 is a multiple of 7. But
91 / 7 = 13, not 65 or 56.
So I conclude there is no solution "using all the *numbers* exactly once". | It isn't the most creative of solutions, but there are contexts in which
>
> 97/15 = 6, for example, Integer Arithmetic
>
>
> |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | Rendering the equation as
A / B = C
we can make some observations:
1. Solutions for B and C are interchangeable. That is, if there is a solution B=x and C=y then B=y and C=x is also a solution.
2. A has exactly 2 digits.
* If A had 3 digits then we would be left with 1-digit numbers for the divisors (B and C), which prevents the product (A) from being >= 100.
* If A had 1 digit then either B or C would be greater than A which would not work.
3. Consequently, B and C have 3 digits between them, sinnce we have exactly 5 digits to work with and A has 2 of them.
4. Neither B nor C can be exactly 9. If either was 9, then the sum of digits of A would have to be a multiple of 9, and there is no combination of 2 of the remaining digits that meet this requirement.
5. Neither B nor C can be exactly 1. If either was 1, then the other would have to be equal to A. But we can't re-use digits, so this is impossible.
6. Neither B nor C can be exactly 5. If either was 5, then A would need to end in zero or 5. But we can't re-use 5 and zero is not available. (Similarly, neither can end in 5.)
7. Neither B nor C can be exactly 6. If either was 6, then A would need to end with an even digit. But we have no even digits other than 6. (Similarly, neither can end in 6.)
8. A can not end in 5 or 6, for the same reasons given in the previous two observations.
9. Since either B or C must be a single digit (from (3)), and neither can be exactly 1, 5, 6, or 9, then one of them must be 7. Let's use B=7 (since solutions for B and C are symmetrical)
10. we are now down to the following possibilities for A:
17,19,51,57,59,61,67,69,71,79,91,97,99 - of which only 91 is a multiple of 7. But
91 / 7 = 13, not 65 or 56.
So I conclude there is no solution "using all the *numbers* exactly once". | If you permit answers in fields other than the reals, there are rather a lot of solutions\*! For example, in the numbers mod 1697, 1 / 5 = 679, because 679 \* 5 = 1697 \* 2 + 1 ≡ 1 mod 1697.
\* The exact number of solutions depends on some choices you must make about which, if any, of the question marks you allow to be larger than the modulus you are working in. If none are required to be normalized in this way, there are 1910 solutions, but even if you require all three question marks to be "small" there are still 1044 solutions. |
119,329 | As the visual says, get the right equation by using the numbers exactly once.
You must use ALL five numbers exactly once.
You cannot use any other math operators.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/s1D4t.png) | 2023/01/11 | [
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/119329",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com",
"https://puzzling.stackexchange.com/users/77471/"
] | It isn't the most creative of solutions, but there are contexts in which
>
> 97/15 = 6, for example, Integer Arithmetic
>
>
> | If you permit answers in fields other than the reals, there are rather a lot of solutions\*! For example, in the numbers mod 1697, 1 / 5 = 679, because 679 \* 5 = 1697 \* 2 + 1 ≡ 1 mod 1697.
\* The exact number of solutions depends on some choices you must make about which, if any, of the question marks you allow to be larger than the modulus you are working in. If none are required to be normalized in this way, there are 1910 solutions, but even if you require all three question marks to be "small" there are still 1044 solutions. |
72,680 | I have a very large backyard surrounded by a tall cinderblock wall. Not only is it HOT in the summer (NM summers) but the noise that bounces around is bad. Someone walking on the sidewalk next to my home can hear our conversations. Help? A coyote fence? bushes? what can help absorb the noise?
The wall separates two levels. The top level next to the wall is not irrigated nor maintained. I leave it to wildlife vegetation and birds. There are several xeriscaped plants but I have no intention to create a garden of any kind.
About 5 feet below the upper level is the main level where we enjoy the outdoors 8 months out of the year. I garden and plant flowers and allow my pets to enjoy the outdoors. Again, the wall is hot and noise bounces around.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am looking for inexpensive fixes that I can do myself. | 2015/08/30 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/72680",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/41979/"
] | Plant climbing vines at the wall, let them climb and cover. Take note of the "sound walls" around the interstates or beltways around the cities. Many have vines growing over them to aid in the sound deadening. Find what the specie is and go from there. | I agree with the textured blocks mentioned by ojait. The idea is to scatter the sound waves. In fact you could also use wooden slats at, say, 45 degrees. These would reflect the sound skywards (or indeed into the ground). If you use the right timber that won't rot, then the slats can also form a frame for climbing plants. |
72,680 | I have a very large backyard surrounded by a tall cinderblock wall. Not only is it HOT in the summer (NM summers) but the noise that bounces around is bad. Someone walking on the sidewalk next to my home can hear our conversations. Help? A coyote fence? bushes? what can help absorb the noise?
The wall separates two levels. The top level next to the wall is not irrigated nor maintained. I leave it to wildlife vegetation and birds. There are several xeriscaped plants but I have no intention to create a garden of any kind.
About 5 feet below the upper level is the main level where we enjoy the outdoors 8 months out of the year. I garden and plant flowers and allow my pets to enjoy the outdoors. Again, the wall is hot and noise bounces around.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am looking for inexpensive fixes that I can do myself. | 2015/08/30 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/72680",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/41979/"
] | Plant climbing vines at the wall, let them climb and cover. Take note of the "sound walls" around the interstates or beltways around the cities. Many have vines growing over them to aid in the sound deadening. Find what the specie is and go from there. | You can buy sound deadening panels or sheeting - You would construct a fence-like structure inside your block wall, then hang the sound absorbing panels or sheeting from that. The material can be part-covered with regular wooden fencing, or plants, or painted, or a combination. You may be able to get away with only performing this treatment on a couple of the walls to prevent the noise from bouncing around. An example of how this can work is below with a sheeting-style product.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oHMCc.jpg)
[Image is of Acoustiblok fence product](http://www.acoustiblok.com/acoustical_fence.php) |
72,680 | I have a very large backyard surrounded by a tall cinderblock wall. Not only is it HOT in the summer (NM summers) but the noise that bounces around is bad. Someone walking on the sidewalk next to my home can hear our conversations. Help? A coyote fence? bushes? what can help absorb the noise?
The wall separates two levels. The top level next to the wall is not irrigated nor maintained. I leave it to wildlife vegetation and birds. There are several xeriscaped plants but I have no intention to create a garden of any kind.
About 5 feet below the upper level is the main level where we enjoy the outdoors 8 months out of the year. I garden and plant flowers and allow my pets to enjoy the outdoors. Again, the wall is hot and noise bounces around.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am looking for inexpensive fixes that I can do myself. | 2015/08/30 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/72680",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/41979/"
] | Here in Southern California when tract homes are constructed along freeways a block wall is constructed the length of the lots. Similar to yours I'm guessing. Rather than having a smooth and flat surface the face of the blocks are irregular and textured. Some project several inches past plumb while others look to have an angled face. It would appear that the wall was constructed to have an artistic quality when in reality the "erratic" surface is meant to deflect and re-bound sound waves from the near by freeway. (think Stealth Fighter).
It may be too much effort to modify the cinder blocks in your wall to mimic the one I described. I think , as you already mentioned, planting dense shrubbery and trees would dull sound transmission in either direction. I would think that (depending on the climate zone, N.M. is zone 13?) some type of drought resistant hedge (box wood hedges) or tree (cypress) would work. Also consider installing a wooden fence on top of or behind the block wall. Any barriers that the sound waves come into contact with, to or from your house, will dull their volume as they reach your ears. | I agree with the textured blocks mentioned by ojait. The idea is to scatter the sound waves. In fact you could also use wooden slats at, say, 45 degrees. These would reflect the sound skywards (or indeed into the ground). If you use the right timber that won't rot, then the slats can also form a frame for climbing plants. |
72,680 | I have a very large backyard surrounded by a tall cinderblock wall. Not only is it HOT in the summer (NM summers) but the noise that bounces around is bad. Someone walking on the sidewalk next to my home can hear our conversations. Help? A coyote fence? bushes? what can help absorb the noise?
The wall separates two levels. The top level next to the wall is not irrigated nor maintained. I leave it to wildlife vegetation and birds. There are several xeriscaped plants but I have no intention to create a garden of any kind.
About 5 feet below the upper level is the main level where we enjoy the outdoors 8 months out of the year. I garden and plant flowers and allow my pets to enjoy the outdoors. Again, the wall is hot and noise bounces around.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am looking for inexpensive fixes that I can do myself. | 2015/08/30 | [
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/72680",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com",
"https://diy.stackexchange.com/users/41979/"
] | Here in Southern California when tract homes are constructed along freeways a block wall is constructed the length of the lots. Similar to yours I'm guessing. Rather than having a smooth and flat surface the face of the blocks are irregular and textured. Some project several inches past plumb while others look to have an angled face. It would appear that the wall was constructed to have an artistic quality when in reality the "erratic" surface is meant to deflect and re-bound sound waves from the near by freeway. (think Stealth Fighter).
It may be too much effort to modify the cinder blocks in your wall to mimic the one I described. I think , as you already mentioned, planting dense shrubbery and trees would dull sound transmission in either direction. I would think that (depending on the climate zone, N.M. is zone 13?) some type of drought resistant hedge (box wood hedges) or tree (cypress) would work. Also consider installing a wooden fence on top of or behind the block wall. Any barriers that the sound waves come into contact with, to or from your house, will dull their volume as they reach your ears. | You can buy sound deadening panels or sheeting - You would construct a fence-like structure inside your block wall, then hang the sound absorbing panels or sheeting from that. The material can be part-covered with regular wooden fencing, or plants, or painted, or a combination. You may be able to get away with only performing this treatment on a couple of the walls to prevent the noise from bouncing around. An example of how this can work is below with a sheeting-style product.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oHMCc.jpg)
[Image is of Acoustiblok fence product](http://www.acoustiblok.com/acoustical_fence.php) |
381,629 | Since probably 1 month ago I have not been able to get into roblox. I log in and then 1 second later it kicks me out right back to where I started logging in and at this point in time I will pay robux to have this fixed. I have just tried loging in to my account that's it. Does anybody know what has happened if this occures or how to fix it please tell me. | 2021/02/05 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/381629",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/266207/"
] | That is the kind of thing only Roblox support may fix.
If the game does crash (you are suddenly on your desktop and the game is not on) you might want to uninstall/reinstall the game. Something is corrupted in your install.
I don't know Roblox, but since its an online game we can assume your progression is not saved on your PC. So you will lose nothing.
If the game doesn't crash outright (sends you back to desktop) you might be banned. Then your only option is Roblox support. | Try uninstalling Roblox and after that login using the website instead of the app, once you’ve done that reinstall Roblox and see if it works.
:] |
381,629 | Since probably 1 month ago I have not been able to get into roblox. I log in and then 1 second later it kicks me out right back to where I started logging in and at this point in time I will pay robux to have this fixed. I have just tried loging in to my account that's it. Does anybody know what has happened if this occures or how to fix it please tell me. | 2021/02/05 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/381629",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/266207/"
] | That is the kind of thing only Roblox support may fix.
If the game does crash (you are suddenly on your desktop and the game is not on) you might want to uninstall/reinstall the game. Something is corrupted in your install.
I don't know Roblox, but since its an online game we can assume your progression is not saved on your PC. So you will lose nothing.
If the game doesn't crash outright (sends you back to desktop) you might be banned. Then your only option is Roblox support. | Delete Roblox, go on to the website and log in. It will tell you if you are banned or not.
This just happened to me, and it was the result of a 7 day ban. |
381,629 | Since probably 1 month ago I have not been able to get into roblox. I log in and then 1 second later it kicks me out right back to where I started logging in and at this point in time I will pay robux to have this fixed. I have just tried loging in to my account that's it. Does anybody know what has happened if this occures or how to fix it please tell me. | 2021/02/05 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/381629",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/266207/"
] | That is the kind of thing only Roblox support may fix.
If the game does crash (you are suddenly on your desktop and the game is not on) you might want to uninstall/reinstall the game. Something is corrupted in your install.
I don't know Roblox, but since its an online game we can assume your progression is not saved on your PC. So you will lose nothing.
If the game doesn't crash outright (sends you back to desktop) you might be banned. Then your only option is Roblox support. | I tried logging into my account but I couldn't. After that day, I got into my account. I just had to wait 1 day to get to my account, so maybe that might work for you. |
89,990 | I'm new to 3d modelling and I'm working on a chess set, while working on the bishop I ran into a shading problem when changing from flat to smooth shading.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7FJdE.png)
After reading another post it seems the issue is that the smooth shading doesn't know what to do with the sharp edge so my idea was to bevel the edge so it can be smoothed. But when trying that the geometry got all kinds of messed up so what would another way to solve this issue be? Thanks in advanced. | 2017/09/10 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/89990",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/45797/"
] | Try selecting the edges you want to be sharp and then Ctrl+E "Mark Sharp". Then use the Edge Split modifier and disable angle-based splitting. | Don't worry, that's perfectly normal. This is caused by the low number of vertices in your model, and the fact that the viewport only lights it per-vertex. It should look fine in the render.
If it still looks weird in the render, try adding a [Subdivision Surface modifier](https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/modeling/modifiers/generate/subsurf.html) (often called subsurf). |
89,990 | I'm new to 3d modelling and I'm working on a chess set, while working on the bishop I ran into a shading problem when changing from flat to smooth shading.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/7FJdE.png)
After reading another post it seems the issue is that the smooth shading doesn't know what to do with the sharp edge so my idea was to bevel the edge so it can be smoothed. But when trying that the geometry got all kinds of messed up so what would another way to solve this issue be? Thanks in advanced. | 2017/09/10 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/89990",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/45797/"
] | Try selecting the edges you want to be sharp and then Ctrl+E "Mark Sharp". Then use the Edge Split modifier and disable angle-based splitting. | Try Object Data / Normals rollout and enable Auto Smooth with 30⁰ angle (now default value in Blender 2.8).
Setting groups of polys to 'shade smooth' is pretty much useless for low polygon modeling which is why the go-to recommendations for this technique are to 'add more polys'.
Smooth shading basically tries to turn your mesh into a blob of putty, whereas the 30⁰ angle of auto smooth differentiates between angles beyond that limit and renders them differently. |
370,868 | Today I accidentally came across a Stack Overflow profile [Farewell Stack Exchange](https://stackoverflow.com/users/2133061/farewell-stack-exchange). They have a lot of badges and 1.6 Million in people reached, so should have a lot of points.
How did they lose all of their reputation? | 2018/07/11 | [
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/370868",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com",
"https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/6573316/"
] | >
> How did he loose all of his reputation
>
>
>
**FYI** he didn't loose his reputation, his account is temporarily suspended
That account is temporarily suspended all reputation will back after **Sep 17 at 15:26**
due to suspensions his reputation is locked to 1 point | As Paulie\_D already commented, he gave away a lot of bounties. As you can see here: <https://stackoverflow.com/users/2133061/farewell-stack-exchange?tab=bounties&sort=offered> |
23,922 | I have heard a lot of "buzz" about Ethereum, but apparently its 1.0 version won't be released for a while yet.
I have heard a lot of talk about "smart contracts" from people who admire Szabo, but I haven't seen many implementations.
I notice that Ripple lists "contracts" under "future" features, which seems to imply that they are not ready for use yet.
<https://ripple.com/wiki/Main_Page>
The one implementation I have seen is at :
<http://erights.org/>
Are there any other, more popular ways to implement "smart contracts" that are already in use?
Thanks | 2014/03/24 | [
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/23922",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com",
"https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/users/14796/"
] | There is Orisi.org - you can read the whitepaper here [Orisi.org/distributed oracles whitepaper](https://github.com/orisi/wiki/wiki/Performing-a-Timelock-transaction), and run an [example Timelock contract](https://github.com/orisi/wiki/wiki/Performing-a-Timelock-transaction) here.
The differences between distributed oracles/Orisi and Ethereum are:
* Orisi works on top of Bitcoin, so there are no other currencies inbetween
* oracles can reference external inputs, so you can create a contract that finalizes based on weather/currency prices, or even [mechanical turk](http://orisi.net/discussion/4/mturk-and-distributed-oracles-two-tiered-arbitration#latest)
* it's available today
* on the other hand, it has a different trust mechanism than Ethereum - oracles are supposed to be run by trusted independent parties. So, instead of proof of work, you have a proof of identity.
You can also read this blogpost by one of the bitcoin core devs: [bit-thereum](http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2014/06/bit-thereum.html). It explains why m of n oracles might be a good solution for contracts. | I think that multi signature can be used to implement smart contracts, meaning that 2 or more signatures are needed to confirm the transaction for it to go through. E.g. a signature from the buyer and seller. I am not very sure but it's probably worth reading. |
3,275,985 | It is mentioned in the following article
<https://cacm.acm.org/news/210107-in-memoriam-rudolf-kalman-19302016/fulltext>
that (with attribution which I suspect is wrong)
>
> He also worked with Yu-Chi Ho on the minimal realization problem, resulting in what came to be known as the Ho-Kálmán algorithm.
>
>
>
I know that Yu-Chi Ho did work with Kalman, but on Kalman-Ho-Narendra Theorem, for example,
[Reference for Kalman-Ho-Narendra Theorem](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2564694/reference-for-kalman-ho-narendra-theorem)
On the other hand, in <http://www.ece.uah.edu/PDFs/news/RT-sprsum2002.pdf>, we can find the following mentioned by the mathematician R. W. Bass,
>
> During the years just before and after Kalman accepted a professorship at Stanford in 1964 he published algebraic results pertaining to realization theory, or modeling of linear input-output systems, which laid the groundwork for a stunning discovery by his graduate student B. L. Ho. I am referring to Ho's doctoral dissertation's main result, published in 1966 as a joint paper with Kalman, which I regard as the most profound theorem pertaining to the Systems Identification (ID) problem.
>
>
>
the said paper (that I can trace) is "Effective Construction of Linear State-Variable Models from Input/Output Functions".
I know that Yu-Chi Ho is also called Larry Ho (at least according to wiki), and is a big shot in control theory. But he apparently is not Kalman's student, nor did he graduate from Stanford. The most recent news about B.L.Ho is in this article <http://www.sontaglab.org/FTPDIR/kalman_students_article_2010.pdf>
where only his name appeared.
I wonder who B.L. Ho is? (at least the full name) Am I right that he is not Yu-Chi Ho? Many thanks! | 2019/06/27 | [
"https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3275985",
"https://math.stackexchange.com",
"https://math.stackexchange.com/users/155789/"
] | Yes, B.L. Ho is Bin-Lun Ho, my father. I only recently found out his association with Rudolf Kahman as I was looking over copies of his doctoral dissertation. He went on after his time at Stanford to work in the hard disk drive industry. | Yu-Chi Ho is professor with Harvard University, refer to
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yu-Chi_Ho>
Luckily have several talks with him and he sometimes mentioned his experience worked with Kalman. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Before you buy a tablet, try using pen tool and see if you like it. Most logos are made by manipulating shapes so a tablet is not needed in such scenario. If you're planning to draw comics or something close to that then a tablet might come in handy. | There is a really short answer to this: generally speaking, *Photoshop and Illustrator are not designed to be used with the mouse.* If you use a mouse with them, you are going to do work with 1/10th of the quality while taking 10x the time.
Also note that you don’t really draw with a Wacom tablet. In Photoshop, it is more of an airbrush. In Illustrator, it is more like a super-accurate mouse.
Basic Wacom tablet is about $69, which is a fraction of the cost of Photoshop and Illustrator. The adjustment and learning time is offset immediately by faster and better work for the rest of your life. So the only reason to work Photoshop and Illustrator with a mouse is you just don’t know any better. It is not a situation of some prefer the pen, some prefer the mouse. I can’t hire a Photoshop artist who doesn’t use a pen because they cannot keep up with the quality and quantity of work that I would assign them unless they use a pen. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Before you buy a tablet, try using pen tool and see if you like it. Most logos are made by manipulating shapes so a tablet is not needed in such scenario. If you're planning to draw comics or something close to that then a tablet might come in handy. | It depends on you I think. My friend, who is a graphic designer, swears by the Wacom Intuos. He likes the fact that it is able to connect to Mac and PCs, plus it's compact for travel. It's for beginners but that could be beneficial until you get used to using a drawing tablet. Check out the reviews before purchasing. Here's what I came across that have been the most helpful:
[Here’s The Best Drawing Tablet That We Guarantee You’ll Love](http://canyouactually.com/best-drawing-tablet/)
and [Neat Designs](http://neatdesigns.net/top-10-tablets-for-graphic-designers/). |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Well. This is opinion based, but here I go.
I have an Intuos 5 Touch. That is my second tablet. Cool talblet. **But I almost never use it**.
I only use it from time to time for photo retouching, like removing imperfections on a portrait skin. That is it.
My workflow can be non standard, becouse I do some, what can be considered photo retouching and compositing, inside a vector program. (Like this: [Creating an implied floor with light](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/63835/creating-an-implied-floor-with-light/63851#63851)
**The reason I do not really use it:**
Well the point is that on a drawing tablet you need to keep the pen floating above the tablet. Any shake is recorded and a click is made either by lowering the tip to the pad or using a secondary button on the pen. When I move my muscles it can vary a little the intended position.
**I use a very good and sensitive mouse**, on a really clean surface. When I have it on the right position, the click does not move at all the pointer position.
For cuting a photo, inside photoshop for example, you can need that kind of precision, so it is relative if you need it for photo retouching.
I like that precision. Thoose are my needs.
**Do I like it?**
On thoose rare ocations I use it, yes. For my everyday workflow, no. But I like the idea that some day I will be more digital painter.
**A Tablet is not necesarly for drawing**
In my case I feel it that it is not for drawing, but for "painting".
Retouching a photo more freely, like hunting imperfections can be painting.
So it really depends on your workflow. | It's worth it if you are willing to practice it, nobody has ever mastered anything without practicing. I started out with pencils. I was bad, real bad. But I looked at a few tutorials and just started drawing. Then a few years past and I wanted to draw again so I bought a drawing tablet and I was still really bad. real bad. Tried and it's the same.. I was kinda bad at the start but you get slowly better.
**PROS**
1. Increase in production
2. More room for error
3. No hassle with having to scan it
**CONS**
1. IF you are lazy you won't get anywhere and you will have wasted money
-[artfixed](https://artfixed.com/best-drawing-tablet/) |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Before you buy a tablet, try using pen tool and see if you like it. Most logos are made by manipulating shapes so a tablet is not needed in such scenario. If you're planning to draw comics or something close to that then a tablet might come in handy. | An interesting question I thought I'd weigh in on as an illustrator. A wacom is probably a good thing to have if you're making art digitally, if only for the ergonomic reason. There's a lot of personal preference regarding whether a mouse or wacom is best for certain programs, so if you have the chance to just play with one for a while, that would be good. For example, some people (myself included) can't get the control they in Illustrator with a wacom, but others do it very well.
Without making a statement based on my opinion, I think you'll find two schools of thought regarding whether a wacom will improve your handwriting or drawing. Because of that, you might avoid looking at that as a factor in deciding to purchase one. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Well. This is opinion based, but here I go.
I have an Intuos 5 Touch. That is my second tablet. Cool talblet. **But I almost never use it**.
I only use it from time to time for photo retouching, like removing imperfections on a portrait skin. That is it.
My workflow can be non standard, becouse I do some, what can be considered photo retouching and compositing, inside a vector program. (Like this: [Creating an implied floor with light](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/63835/creating-an-implied-floor-with-light/63851#63851)
**The reason I do not really use it:**
Well the point is that on a drawing tablet you need to keep the pen floating above the tablet. Any shake is recorded and a click is made either by lowering the tip to the pad or using a secondary button on the pen. When I move my muscles it can vary a little the intended position.
**I use a very good and sensitive mouse**, on a really clean surface. When I have it on the right position, the click does not move at all the pointer position.
For cuting a photo, inside photoshop for example, you can need that kind of precision, so it is relative if you need it for photo retouching.
I like that precision. Thoose are my needs.
**Do I like it?**
On thoose rare ocations I use it, yes. For my everyday workflow, no. But I like the idea that some day I will be more digital painter.
**A Tablet is not necesarly for drawing**
In my case I feel it that it is not for drawing, but for "painting".
Retouching a photo more freely, like hunting imperfections can be painting.
So it really depends on your workflow. | There is a really short answer to this: generally speaking, *Photoshop and Illustrator are not designed to be used with the mouse.* If you use a mouse with them, you are going to do work with 1/10th of the quality while taking 10x the time.
Also note that you don’t really draw with a Wacom tablet. In Photoshop, it is more of an airbrush. In Illustrator, it is more like a super-accurate mouse.
Basic Wacom tablet is about $69, which is a fraction of the cost of Photoshop and Illustrator. The adjustment and learning time is offset immediately by faster and better work for the rest of your life. So the only reason to work Photoshop and Illustrator with a mouse is you just don’t know any better. It is not a situation of some prefer the pen, some prefer the mouse. I can’t hire a Photoshop artist who doesn’t use a pen because they cannot keep up with the quality and quantity of work that I would assign them unless they use a pen. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | A tablet can make your workflow more efficient, even if you are not an illustrator with a hand drawn style. Particularly, it can make photo retouching in PS more efficient.
* If you buy a tablet that comes (or can be used) with a **pressure sensitive pen**, then you can program the pressure of the pen to do different things for you. You can program it to change the opacity of the brush, for example, so the harder you press the tip of the pen against the tablet the more opaque the strokes are. You can also (or instead) program it to change the width of the brush so the harder you press, the thicker the brush becomes.
* More advanced pens also have **tilt sensitivity**, so you can program the pen to change settings for you depending on the angle in which you are holding it. For example, suppose you have a brush that is not round but a very narrow ellipse. You can program the pen to rotate the orientation of the "footprint" of your brush when you tilt it more or less, which can be very handy to "attack" the area you are retouching from different angles.
* The tablet might also come with extra programmable buttons, which you can wire to do tasks you perform very often, for example, "Toggle background/foreground colour" which is done constantly when you are working with masks.
All these things can be done in PS without a tablet, of course, but it takes a lot of key pressing and finger yoga. It is way more efficient and ergonomic when you can change these settings by only pressing harder or softer on the tablet or tilting the pen.
By the way, by programming I mean "selecting an option in PS", not "writing a device handler in C++". And by brush I don't mean only the brush tool but any similar tool such as the eraser, the smudging tools, the retouching tools, etc.
As Naty mentioned, it does take time to adapt to a different mindset. You will also find that when you are using the tablet, even when you could do everything that can be done with the mouse, certain simple tasks (such as re-sizing) become cumbersome because their interface was designed with a mouse in mind. Eventually you will learn which tasks are better done with which device and learn when to switch to keep yourself efficient, sane and carpal tunnel free. | It depends on you I think. My friend, who is a graphic designer, swears by the Wacom Intuos. He likes the fact that it is able to connect to Mac and PCs, plus it's compact for travel. It's for beginners but that could be beneficial until you get used to using a drawing tablet. Check out the reviews before purchasing. Here's what I came across that have been the most helpful:
[Here’s The Best Drawing Tablet That We Guarantee You’ll Love](http://canyouactually.com/best-drawing-tablet/)
and [Neat Designs](http://neatdesigns.net/top-10-tablets-for-graphic-designers/). |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Well. This is opinion based, but here I go.
I have an Intuos 5 Touch. That is my second tablet. Cool talblet. **But I almost never use it**.
I only use it from time to time for photo retouching, like removing imperfections on a portrait skin. That is it.
My workflow can be non standard, becouse I do some, what can be considered photo retouching and compositing, inside a vector program. (Like this: [Creating an implied floor with light](https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/63835/creating-an-implied-floor-with-light/63851#63851)
**The reason I do not really use it:**
Well the point is that on a drawing tablet you need to keep the pen floating above the tablet. Any shake is recorded and a click is made either by lowering the tip to the pad or using a secondary button on the pen. When I move my muscles it can vary a little the intended position.
**I use a very good and sensitive mouse**, on a really clean surface. When I have it on the right position, the click does not move at all the pointer position.
For cuting a photo, inside photoshop for example, you can need that kind of precision, so it is relative if you need it for photo retouching.
I like that precision. Thoose are my needs.
**Do I like it?**
On thoose rare ocations I use it, yes. For my everyday workflow, no. But I like the idea that some day I will be more digital painter.
**A Tablet is not necesarly for drawing**
In my case I feel it that it is not for drawing, but for "painting".
Retouching a photo more freely, like hunting imperfections can be painting.
So it really depends on your workflow. | It depends on you I think. My friend, who is a graphic designer, swears by the Wacom Intuos. He likes the fact that it is able to connect to Mac and PCs, plus it's compact for travel. It's for beginners but that could be beneficial until you get used to using a drawing tablet. Check out the reviews before purchasing. Here's what I came across that have been the most helpful:
[Here’s The Best Drawing Tablet That We Guarantee You’ll Love](http://canyouactually.com/best-drawing-tablet/)
and [Neat Designs](http://neatdesigns.net/top-10-tablets-for-graphic-designers/). |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | A tablet can make your workflow more efficient, even if you are not an illustrator with a hand drawn style. Particularly, it can make photo retouching in PS more efficient.
* If you buy a tablet that comes (or can be used) with a **pressure sensitive pen**, then you can program the pressure of the pen to do different things for you. You can program it to change the opacity of the brush, for example, so the harder you press the tip of the pen against the tablet the more opaque the strokes are. You can also (or instead) program it to change the width of the brush so the harder you press, the thicker the brush becomes.
* More advanced pens also have **tilt sensitivity**, so you can program the pen to change settings for you depending on the angle in which you are holding it. For example, suppose you have a brush that is not round but a very narrow ellipse. You can program the pen to rotate the orientation of the "footprint" of your brush when you tilt it more or less, which can be very handy to "attack" the area you are retouching from different angles.
* The tablet might also come with extra programmable buttons, which you can wire to do tasks you perform very often, for example, "Toggle background/foreground colour" which is done constantly when you are working with masks.
All these things can be done in PS without a tablet, of course, but it takes a lot of key pressing and finger yoga. It is way more efficient and ergonomic when you can change these settings by only pressing harder or softer on the tablet or tilting the pen.
By the way, by programming I mean "selecting an option in PS", not "writing a device handler in C++". And by brush I don't mean only the brush tool but any similar tool such as the eraser, the smudging tools, the retouching tools, etc.
As Naty mentioned, it does take time to adapt to a different mindset. You will also find that when you are using the tablet, even when you could do everything that can be done with the mouse, certain simple tasks (such as re-sizing) become cumbersome because their interface was designed with a mouse in mind. Eventually you will learn which tasks are better done with which device and learn when to switch to keep yourself efficient, sane and carpal tunnel free. | Before you buy a tablet, try using pen tool and see if you like it. Most logos are made by manipulating shapes so a tablet is not needed in such scenario. If you're planning to draw comics or something close to that then a tablet might come in handy. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | There is a really short answer to this: generally speaking, *Photoshop and Illustrator are not designed to be used with the mouse.* If you use a mouse with them, you are going to do work with 1/10th of the quality while taking 10x the time.
Also note that you don’t really draw with a Wacom tablet. In Photoshop, it is more of an airbrush. In Illustrator, it is more like a super-accurate mouse.
Basic Wacom tablet is about $69, which is a fraction of the cost of Photoshop and Illustrator. The adjustment and learning time is offset immediately by faster and better work for the rest of your life. So the only reason to work Photoshop and Illustrator with a mouse is you just don’t know any better. It is not a situation of some prefer the pen, some prefer the mouse. I can’t hire a Photoshop artist who doesn’t use a pen because they cannot keep up with the quality and quantity of work that I would assign them unless they use a pen. | It is not worth it, I've been working with it for some years and at the end I upgraded to anew MacBook pro and needed to "upgrade" to new tablet.
I wouldn't recommend them for their lack of flexibility and how hard was always to configure them to work.
I would advise to go with an iPad and procreate - I truly believe is the future in graphic design and illustration. |
49,343 | I'm a CS graduate and I've been programming small personal utility tools for my self. I recently did some photo retouching in Photoshop and thought "well, this isn't all that bad, maybe I should take it one step further". So I pulled a sheet of paper out and then realized... I'm really, really bad at drawing.
I'm wanting to do some graphics design effects for my program's logo or something like that. I almost bought a Wacom Intuos Pro Medium, just for photo editing, but now I'm really on the fence about it.
* Should I buy a Wacom tablet or would it be a waste of money?
* Would a tablet improve both my handwriting and/or drawing? | 2015/03/07 | [
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/questions/49343",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com",
"https://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/users/40499/"
] | Before you buy a tablet, try using pen tool and see if you like it. Most logos are made by manipulating shapes so a tablet is not needed in such scenario. If you're planning to draw comics or something close to that then a tablet might come in handy. | It is not worth it, I've been working with it for some years and at the end I upgraded to anew MacBook pro and needed to "upgrade" to new tablet.
I wouldn't recommend them for their lack of flexibility and how hard was always to configure them to work.
I would advise to go with an iPad and procreate - I truly believe is the future in graphic design and illustration. |
1,157,927 | I'm involved in a development project that is using freeglut (based on the long defunct glut) for it's client.
The client will eventually allow full interaction with a large-scale 3d environment. Should I let the development continue with freeglut (is it even possible) or should I advise they use another alternative such as libsdl, opentk or even axiom.
I'm not a graphics person but I get the feeling freeglut might potentially be a limited choice.
The most convincing answer (for or against) will be accredited.
EDIT: A few points to make...
* The project is already using the Tao Framework.
* DirectX and XNA are not options (ie: something like freeglut or libsdl has to be used).
I did do my research and found that freeglut was once again under active development and that they have a release pending. That doesn't change my feeling that it may still be a potentially limited choice.
My question isn't on how it's done but on whether or not freeglut is still a viable choice for something that could potentially get big and whether or not there are more "modern" solutions that might ease development a bit.
EDIT: It would help if other alternatives have better mutli-threading support (not for rendering objects but for processing data and so forth).
EDIT: To elaborate a bit more... the client must work in at least linux and windows.
Thanks! | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1157927",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/138290/"
] | I don't think there's anything wrong with freeglut. It is being actively developed, and there is an active board for support on Nabble.
That said, it is not difficult to create an OpenGL context in Windows, so why not just use it directly? I always thought people used Glut/FreeGlut because that was what the Red Book used. (though the callbacks for mouse and keyboard do simplify things) I never timed it, but Glut always felt a little slower than using OpenGL through interop.
The [Tao project](http://www.taoframework.com/) has a good OpenGL wrapper if you want to use OpenGL directly. It also has nice .Net bindings for FreeGlut and GLFW, a Glut alternative which offers mouse and keyboard callbacks too. | OpenGL with C# is done via wrappers. Most of them are not actively developed for anymore.
The canonical choice for 3d development with c# is either using managed directX, or using the XNA libraries.
R |
1,157,927 | I'm involved in a development project that is using freeglut (based on the long defunct glut) for it's client.
The client will eventually allow full interaction with a large-scale 3d environment. Should I let the development continue with freeglut (is it even possible) or should I advise they use another alternative such as libsdl, opentk or even axiom.
I'm not a graphics person but I get the feeling freeglut might potentially be a limited choice.
The most convincing answer (for or against) will be accredited.
EDIT: A few points to make...
* The project is already using the Tao Framework.
* DirectX and XNA are not options (ie: something like freeglut or libsdl has to be used).
I did do my research and found that freeglut was once again under active development and that they have a release pending. That doesn't change my feeling that it may still be a potentially limited choice.
My question isn't on how it's done but on whether or not freeglut is still a viable choice for something that could potentially get big and whether or not there are more "modern" solutions that might ease development a bit.
EDIT: It would help if other alternatives have better mutli-threading support (not for rendering objects but for processing data and so forth).
EDIT: To elaborate a bit more... the client must work in at least linux and windows.
Thanks! | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1157927",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/138290/"
] | I'd go for libsdl, its multimedia capabilities make it easier to work with audio hardware as well, it has native bindings to C# and a variety of other languages, and can also be of use if you ever decide to integrate a mobile interface for your project. | OpenGL with C# is done via wrappers. Most of them are not actively developed for anymore.
The canonical choice for 3d development with c# is either using managed directX, or using the XNA libraries.
R |
1,157,927 | I'm involved in a development project that is using freeglut (based on the long defunct glut) for it's client.
The client will eventually allow full interaction with a large-scale 3d environment. Should I let the development continue with freeglut (is it even possible) or should I advise they use another alternative such as libsdl, opentk or even axiom.
I'm not a graphics person but I get the feeling freeglut might potentially be a limited choice.
The most convincing answer (for or against) will be accredited.
EDIT: A few points to make...
* The project is already using the Tao Framework.
* DirectX and XNA are not options (ie: something like freeglut or libsdl has to be used).
I did do my research and found that freeglut was once again under active development and that they have a release pending. That doesn't change my feeling that it may still be a potentially limited choice.
My question isn't on how it's done but on whether or not freeglut is still a viable choice for something that could potentially get big and whether or not there are more "modern" solutions that might ease development a bit.
EDIT: It would help if other alternatives have better mutli-threading support (not for rendering objects but for processing data and so forth).
EDIT: To elaborate a bit more... the client must work in at least linux and windows.
Thanks! | 2009/07/21 | [
"https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/1157927",
"https://Stackoverflow.com",
"https://Stackoverflow.com/users/138290/"
] | I don't think there's anything wrong with freeglut. It is being actively developed, and there is an active board for support on Nabble.
That said, it is not difficult to create an OpenGL context in Windows, so why not just use it directly? I always thought people used Glut/FreeGlut because that was what the Red Book used. (though the callbacks for mouse and keyboard do simplify things) I never timed it, but Glut always felt a little slower than using OpenGL through interop.
The [Tao project](http://www.taoframework.com/) has a good OpenGL wrapper if you want to use OpenGL directly. It also has nice .Net bindings for FreeGlut and GLFW, a Glut alternative which offers mouse and keyboard callbacks too. | I'd go for libsdl, its multimedia capabilities make it easier to work with audio hardware as well, it has native bindings to C# and a variety of other languages, and can also be of use if you ever decide to integrate a mobile interface for your project. |
434,567 | According to Dell's [documentation](http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/products/pedge/en/Dell-PowerEdge-R720-1100W-E5-2640-Family-Data-Sheet.pdf) (PDF) administrators can cap the new R720's at a certain Wattage. What are the ramifications of doing this? Will the server power off once it hits the cap? Is there a performance hit to the users accessing the server? | 2012/10/03 | [
"https://serverfault.com/questions/434567",
"https://serverfault.com",
"https://serverfault.com/users/135154/"
] | You don't move the SQL Server install. (Or *really*, **really** shouldn't.)
You install SQL server fresh on a new machine and **move the databases**.
[Here's a rather long step-by-step article form Microsoft on how to move all the "stuff" from one SQL Server install to a SQL Server install on another machine](http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314546).
It's too long to post here, but the section headers are:
>
> Step 1: How to move user databases
>
>
> Step 2: How to transfer logins and passwords
>
>
> Step 3: How to resolve orphaned users
>
>
> Step 4: How to move jobs, alerts, and operators
>
>
> Step 5: How to move DTS packages
>
>
> Step 6: Change the sp\_configure settings to match the previous
> computer
>
>
> | If you have access to the database files (mdf and ldf) then you can copy those to a new SQL Server and attach them. |
13,626 | I want to be able to create addons for any game, the example I will use is League of Legends. With addons I mean, for example when my level integer changes I want to play a sound in the background.
The programming language I want to use is C#.
What I want to know is how I'm able to read my level integer inside C#, from there on I should be able to do anything I want.
What I've found out is, with a program like Cheat Engine you can look for memory values and adresses inside your RAM. And I think there is a way to assign a variable in C# to the value of a memory adress. But how can I find the value of my level in the first place? The memory adress might change each time I start the game or even level up. I think it has something to do with pointers, but where do I find the pointer?
But the biggest problem is that I can't even find some values I look for iside the memory. Maybe it encrypts the values? How can I find out what it does and where it puts it? An example is Flash games. If you look for the variable money that has a value of 100 you need to multiply it by 8 and look for 800 iside the memory of that process.
* How do I find the correct memory adress each time?
* How do I find out the way it might save a variable?
I'll give any extra information about the problem if you want. | 2011/06/14 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/13626",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/7991/"
] | You can do this in C#, but you'll likely need to [P/Invoke](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_Invocation_Services) a lot of the functionality you'd need. C or C++ is probably more well-suited to the task -- you'll have fewer hoops to jump through. There are a few [open source "cheat engine"](http://www.cheatengine.org/aboutce.php) projects out there you can look at for a better idea of what you're going to have to do.
>
> How do I find the correct memory
> adress each time?
>
>
>
Mostly through trial and error. A *lot* of trial and error. Once you've found it the first time, you may be able to rely on the fact that it will be located at a fixed offset from the load address of the program, but this will only be true for a very small subset of the data manipulated by any given program. You will likely need to relocate the variable in memory every time.
>
> How do I find out the way it might
> save a variable?
>
>
>
By reading the disassembled machine code of the program, you may eventually be able to locate how it modifies a particular variable. This will be extremely tedious.
I think you are biting off way more than you can chew here, but the basic (naive) premise here is that you have to scan the process memory for a value that matches the one you are after -- if you have 100 hit points, you start walking the entire thing looking for values of 100 (as 8, 16 and 32 bit values) and keeping track of the addresses you find. Once you have that initial set, you change the value you are looking for -- get hit, for example, so you now have 94 hit points. Then you scan the addresses you found before to see which ones are now 94. You can eventually narrow down the address in question this way.
Of course this doesn't always work; sometimes you'll only find a display value and not the real representation of health (which may be stored as a float from 0 to 1 instead of an integer from 1 to 100) in which case modifying that integer won't really impact game play at all -- you'd still die, you'd just have a full health meter when you did so. Games and technology vary wildly, and what works for one will usually not work for others.
This is generally a very complex topic and the above is only a very naive, superficial overview. Practically speaking you're probably much better off simply *using* an existing tool or contributing to an open source project oriented at making one, because the way you've phrased your question honestly makes it sound like you aren't ready for this kind of project. | The question you want an answer to is inherently unanswerable ... at least in this format. You want to start poking around in the memory, which, with most modern programs can be an exercise in futility when you take into account garbage collection and memory defragmenting algorithms. That means that values will shift around in memory, and only the program itself will know the value addresses.
Without modifying the program, you probably won't be able to do what you're looking for. |
13,626 | I want to be able to create addons for any game, the example I will use is League of Legends. With addons I mean, for example when my level integer changes I want to play a sound in the background.
The programming language I want to use is C#.
What I want to know is how I'm able to read my level integer inside C#, from there on I should be able to do anything I want.
What I've found out is, with a program like Cheat Engine you can look for memory values and adresses inside your RAM. And I think there is a way to assign a variable in C# to the value of a memory adress. But how can I find the value of my level in the first place? The memory adress might change each time I start the game or even level up. I think it has something to do with pointers, but where do I find the pointer?
But the biggest problem is that I can't even find some values I look for iside the memory. Maybe it encrypts the values? How can I find out what it does and where it puts it? An example is Flash games. If you look for the variable money that has a value of 100 you need to multiply it by 8 and look for 800 iside the memory of that process.
* How do I find the correct memory adress each time?
* How do I find out the way it might save a variable?
I'll give any extra information about the problem if you want. | 2011/06/14 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/13626",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/7991/"
] | I've found the answer myself, excuse me for such a hesitant post.
To find a static memory address you can use Cheat Engine.
Scan for your health variable, right-click it and press Pointer scan for this address.
A pointer basically points to another memory address that might hold a useful value.
It is possible that you have a multilevel pointer, a pointer to a pointer to a pointer to a pointer to your health variable.
This scan will look for all memory addresses that have the value of your variables address.
This list can be gigantic when finished scanning, therefore you must close and reopen your game, look for your health variable again and open your old pointer scan results. Now you need to rescan the pointers with the new memory address of your health, each time you do this cycle your list will get narrower and narrower until you get an accurate base pointer that is always correct.
If the memory values are 'encrypted', for example flash player multiplies your variable by 8 before putting it into memory and divides it when utilising it. In order to find your variables and base pointers you can use Cheat Engine scanning methods to scan for Unknown initial value. Lose some health in the game and look for decreased values, heal in the game and look for increased value. Repeat this cycle until you get an accurate result. Now you can find out the ratio between the health value displayed in the game and the value you have found in Cheat Engine.
I've been able to read my League of Legends Health, maxHealth and Level variables since yesterday. I've learned a lot and for what I'm aiming for I will have to learn A LOT more.
Thanks for trying to help me anyway, everyone! | The question you want an answer to is inherently unanswerable ... at least in this format. You want to start poking around in the memory, which, with most modern programs can be an exercise in futility when you take into account garbage collection and memory defragmenting algorithms. That means that values will shift around in memory, and only the program itself will know the value addresses.
Without modifying the program, you probably won't be able to do what you're looking for. |
13,626 | I want to be able to create addons for any game, the example I will use is League of Legends. With addons I mean, for example when my level integer changes I want to play a sound in the background.
The programming language I want to use is C#.
What I want to know is how I'm able to read my level integer inside C#, from there on I should be able to do anything I want.
What I've found out is, with a program like Cheat Engine you can look for memory values and adresses inside your RAM. And I think there is a way to assign a variable in C# to the value of a memory adress. But how can I find the value of my level in the first place? The memory adress might change each time I start the game or even level up. I think it has something to do with pointers, but where do I find the pointer?
But the biggest problem is that I can't even find some values I look for iside the memory. Maybe it encrypts the values? How can I find out what it does and where it puts it? An example is Flash games. If you look for the variable money that has a value of 100 you need to multiply it by 8 and look for 800 iside the memory of that process.
* How do I find the correct memory adress each time?
* How do I find out the way it might save a variable?
I'll give any extra information about the problem if you want. | 2011/06/14 | [
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/13626",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com",
"https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/users/7991/"
] | You can do this in C#, but you'll likely need to [P/Invoke](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_Invocation_Services) a lot of the functionality you'd need. C or C++ is probably more well-suited to the task -- you'll have fewer hoops to jump through. There are a few [open source "cheat engine"](http://www.cheatengine.org/aboutce.php) projects out there you can look at for a better idea of what you're going to have to do.
>
> How do I find the correct memory
> adress each time?
>
>
>
Mostly through trial and error. A *lot* of trial and error. Once you've found it the first time, you may be able to rely on the fact that it will be located at a fixed offset from the load address of the program, but this will only be true for a very small subset of the data manipulated by any given program. You will likely need to relocate the variable in memory every time.
>
> How do I find out the way it might
> save a variable?
>
>
>
By reading the disassembled machine code of the program, you may eventually be able to locate how it modifies a particular variable. This will be extremely tedious.
I think you are biting off way more than you can chew here, but the basic (naive) premise here is that you have to scan the process memory for a value that matches the one you are after -- if you have 100 hit points, you start walking the entire thing looking for values of 100 (as 8, 16 and 32 bit values) and keeping track of the addresses you find. Once you have that initial set, you change the value you are looking for -- get hit, for example, so you now have 94 hit points. Then you scan the addresses you found before to see which ones are now 94. You can eventually narrow down the address in question this way.
Of course this doesn't always work; sometimes you'll only find a display value and not the real representation of health (which may be stored as a float from 0 to 1 instead of an integer from 1 to 100) in which case modifying that integer won't really impact game play at all -- you'd still die, you'd just have a full health meter when you did so. Games and technology vary wildly, and what works for one will usually not work for others.
This is generally a very complex topic and the above is only a very naive, superficial overview. Practically speaking you're probably much better off simply *using* an existing tool or contributing to an open source project oriented at making one, because the way you've phrased your question honestly makes it sound like you aren't ready for this kind of project. | I've found the answer myself, excuse me for such a hesitant post.
To find a static memory address you can use Cheat Engine.
Scan for your health variable, right-click it and press Pointer scan for this address.
A pointer basically points to another memory address that might hold a useful value.
It is possible that you have a multilevel pointer, a pointer to a pointer to a pointer to a pointer to your health variable.
This scan will look for all memory addresses that have the value of your variables address.
This list can be gigantic when finished scanning, therefore you must close and reopen your game, look for your health variable again and open your old pointer scan results. Now you need to rescan the pointers with the new memory address of your health, each time you do this cycle your list will get narrower and narrower until you get an accurate base pointer that is always correct.
If the memory values are 'encrypted', for example flash player multiplies your variable by 8 before putting it into memory and divides it when utilising it. In order to find your variables and base pointers you can use Cheat Engine scanning methods to scan for Unknown initial value. Lose some health in the game and look for decreased values, heal in the game and look for increased value. Repeat this cycle until you get an accurate result. Now you can find out the ratio between the health value displayed in the game and the value you have found in Cheat Engine.
I've been able to read my League of Legends Health, maxHealth and Level variables since yesterday. I've learned a lot and for what I'm aiming for I will have to learn A LOT more.
Thanks for trying to help me anyway, everyone! |
154,611 | In the D&D 5e PHB, on page 211 there is a 1st level spell called [Alarm](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/alarm). In the description, it has a sentence:
>
> When you cast the spell, you can designate creatures that won't set off the alarm.
>
>
>
This leaves it a little vague as to whether or not said creatures must be explicitly stated, or whether general categories of creatures can be indicated. It makes sense to explicitly name party members, with the exception of the rogue, that will not set off the alarm. However, what about designating creatures by groups? Here are several examples:
* The city guards won't set off the alarm (some of which the spell caster knows and others they do not know)
* Tiny creatures won't set off the alarm
* Tiny insects won't set off the alarm (telling if something is tiny is not too bad, but how would the spell know if the creature is an insect)
* Good aligned creatures won't sent off the alarm
Are there any clarifications or restrictions on how one can designate which creatures the Alarm spell ignores? | 2019/09/02 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/154611",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/40206/"
] | Ask your GM how specific they will let the spell be
---------------------------------------------------
The spell only states:
>
> [...] Until the spell ends, an alarm alerts you whenever a tiny or larger creature touches or enters the warded area. When you cast the spell you can designate creatures that won't set off the alarm...
>
>
>
It never further specifies how you can designate the creatures that will not trigger the alarm, how specific you can be, or anything of the sort. This leaves it up to your GM to decide.
Personally I would look to other spells and what wording they use:
The *locate creature* spell states:
>
> Describe or name a creature that is familiar to you...
>
> The spell can locate a specific creature known to you, or the nearest creature of a specific kind...
>
>
>
The *scrying* spell states:
>
> You can see and hear a particular creature...
>
>
>
The *message* spell states:
>
> You point your finger toward a creature within range and Whisper a message...
>
>
>
The *magic circle* spell states:
>
> [...] Choose one or more of the following types of creatures - Celestials, Elementals, fey, Fiends, or Undead...
>
>
>
The *magic mouth* spell states:
>
> [...] The triggering circumstance can be as general or as detailed as you like...
>
>
>
Using these we can see that *alarm* does not require a specific creature, nor even a familiar creature. It also doesn't require a creature to be within some distance. However, it does not say, like *magic mouth* does, that the trigger can be as specific as you want. This leaves it up to the GM to determine what counts as "too specific". | No not with RAW
===============
As pointed out in your question, there are not a specific parameters for which creatures to designate.
The [*alarm*](https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/alarm) spell description states (emphasis mine):
>
> When you cast the spell, you can designate creature**s** that won't set off the alarm.
>
>
>
This can perhaps be an issue as there are very few limitations on who to designate.
Possible workaround
-------------------
Due to this unspecific nature, one solution would be to rule that when *alarm* is cast, any creature within the range (**30 feet** which is the spell range) of the spell can be designated not to set off the alarm.
Meanwhile, any creature within range at the time of casting, but which have not been designated by the caster, can still trigger the alarm by meeting its condition (e.g. opening a door).
By this approach, you also ensures that there is a physical limit to how many creatures which can be designated, if this is an issue. |
201,424 | I'd like to know what exactly the term '*Wombo Combo*' means.
Does it mean something such as using all 5 champion's ultimates at the same time?
Is it a term only used in League of Legends?
---
**Edit**
So according to [this site](http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/wombo-combo) the origin of the '*Wombo Combo*' term comes from Super Smash Bros Melee (amazing game too) to define an "crazy combo".
For LoL does it means instakill everyone?
What are the famous '*Wombo Combo*' of LoL? | 2015/01/11 | [
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/201424",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com",
"https://gaming.stackexchange.com/users/99349/"
] | The origin of the "Wombo Combo" comes from Super Smash Bros Melee, as you stated in the question, and it is defined as *two players in the game chain together certain moves to highly damage and/or kill the enemy*. The moves compliment each other and thus create a combo.
In League of Legends it means the same, to combine moves (not necessarily a champions ultimate only) to create a very strong "combo" attack with your teammate(s).
>
> **What are the famous Wombo Combo of LoL?**
>
>
>
They are ever changing and new ones being made, but some examples are:
* [Blitzcrank's](http://gameinfo.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/champions/blitzcrank/) **Power Fist** to knock someone up, followed by [Yasuo's](http://gameinfo.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/champions/yasuo/) **Last Breath** to deal the damage.
* [Orianna's](http://gameinfo.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/champions/orianna/) **Command: Shockwave** to bring everyone together then [Jarvan IV's](http://gameinfo.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/champions/jarvaniv/) **Cataclysm** to keep them there. | [Wombo Combo](http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/wombo-combo) is a term used, primarily, to mean the complete and utter destruction of another person or team, especially if it is done quickly. It is originally from a video of a Super Smash Bros Melee match (below), but has since grown in popularity and is used for many different games and situations to the same effect. There are a large number of Youtube videos that use the same audio track and overlay other situations, gaming or not, as a parody of the original video.
Usually when used in games these days, it is done so in celebration or as a taunt or bragging to the other team. Most of the time, it is just meant as trash talk and is not referring to any action in particular as a Wombo Combo.
Potentially related, it is also a [Pizza Combination at Round Table Pizza](http://www.roundtablepizza.com/rtp/menu.asp?ftype=specialty) with "Primo pepperoni, Italian sausage, linguica, bacon, mushrooms, tomatoes, artichoke hearts, green onions on zesty red sauce." |
190,830 | Is there a node that can separate colors by scale?
I tried separate xyz but it didn't work.
Example:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/M7lhb.png)
What I get:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/aPYpm.png) | 2020/08/13 | [
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/190830",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com",
"https://blender.stackexchange.com/users/100139/"
] | Assuming you want to bevel at a 45° angle:
First (with the Ctrl + B hotkey) you need to press C to enable clamp overlay which will make the bevel stop when a bound has been reached.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QqapN.png)
Then you want to select the mesh and merge by distance (F3 and search it) because the 2 edges will be slid up against each other so that the vertices are very close.
Afterwards you can select the 2 edges forming the bevel and have as many segments as needed.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gpvNz.png)
If you want to make the bevel even bigger, then you can repeat this process again (minus making all the segments) by bevelling the 2 outer edges with 1 segment and with Clamp Overlay turned on. Every time the outer edge meets with another edge, use merge by distance to prevent 2 edges in one place.
You should also join vertices to make sure you don't have an Ngon like so
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NV4lD.png)
You can do it like this but the cleaner and more efficient option is just to use less edge loops like what CtrlAltF2 mentioned earlier.
Edit: Additional picture showing the maximum bevels I could do, not pretty though.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oNh3z.png) | The problem with your mesh is that you have too many vertices.
So, to make this shape, I would start with a cube and scale it to about the size I want (in edit mode so as to preserve a uniform scale). Then I'd add a couple edge loops through the middle of the mesh to draw out the curve. This would look extremely blocky, so I'd add a subsurf modifier. To make the edges of the mesh nice and sharp, I'd crease it ([Keep sharp edges when using subdivision surface](https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/6425/keep-sharp-edges-when-using-subdivision-surface)). Then it would be extremely easy to bevel as needed. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | You've told us:
* your group is playing in a premade campaign that doesn't really have enough plot
* your group is unhappy because there's not enough plot
* one of your players is proposing to make their character secretly-a-villain in order to generate some plot
It seems to me that your problem is not "how can I handle a character being secretly-a-villain?" Your problem is "how can I get my campaign to have some plot?".
---
It sounds like you're already aware that letting a character be secretly-a-villain is risky. In my games, when I've allowed one character to be secretly-a-villain, it turned out pretty badly.
Here's my story: I ran an adventure in which one character had a demon inside him, and if it went unbound, he would turn evil and rampage. At one point the demon went unbound, and the player turned to me happily and said: "Now? I *rampage*." I immediately recognized that letting him rampage properly would lead to a TPK for the party and a Bad End for the campaign, so I improvised some rampage mechanics for him that didn't do anything effective, and I think the whole table was disappointed with how it turned out.
Here's [a story](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88094/) where something very similar happened. A secretly-a-villain player writes:
>
> I know NOW that I wasn't totally meant to destroy the party THIS TIME. Had the Paladin dead to rights (webbed, grappled by a Drider) at the business end of a Disintegrate spell, when the DM looked at me and went, "Huh. Sorry, I can't allow it."
>
>
>
Phrasing that more abstractly: when you allow one of your players to play an evil character, you are *giving them narrative license to try to wreck your story*.
The player will try to generate story outcomes that the other players won't like -- either directly killing other players' characters, or merely preventing them from accomplishing their goals. And then you'll be forced to adjudicate the situation. You'll have to decide which of your players gets stuck with an unsatisfying outcome where their character fails.
If you really want to do this (and my advice is: seriously don't), you need to think really carefully about what you're going to do, when the villain character attempts to do something that will make the rest of the group fail and lose. Will you let them do it and end the campaign with a defeat for the group? Or will you invoke DM fiat, like in the two situations above, and tell them they're just not allowed to do that?
---
Here's my recommendation for your adventure: don't start messing with secretly-a-villain characters. It wouldn't solve your problem very well and in fact you would then have two problems. Instead, alter the campaign and introduce an NPC villain. You could introduce a villainous organization, or just a recurring villain who's really hard to kill permanently. That will solve your group's problem, and it will also remove the reason why your player wants to be secretly-a-villain. | ### Discuss it among the players first.
Surprise twist villains always sound really interesting in theory, but in practice they tend to backfire explosively when mishandled. I've been in campaigns where this happens. I've run (and ruined) my own campaigns by trying this, even when I thought I was being careful and clever. Of course it's not *impossible* to implement a surprise villain without breaking the game or alienating the players, but it's very risky and it warrants some level of out-of-game communication.
As you mentioned, your session zero didn't cover any rules for handling PVP which means antagonistic play isn't currently part of the social contract. It was acknowledged that PVP may occur, but not how it would manifest and what the boundaries are drawn. You may have players who really don't want PVP, and may feel betrayed (as real-world players, not as in-game characters) when suddenly their cooperative adventure turns into a a hostile PVP scenario, and they realize they aren't playing the game they signed up for.
From your perspective, you may be worried about spoiling your big surprise. But there's nothing inherently bad or good with plot twists. If you are concerned about risking player group cohesion, then perhaps maintaining the players' experience should take priority over trying to surprise them.
By communicating with the other players about your plans, you can accomplish 2 very important things that can help you execute your intended villain plot. First, when you give the secret villain character special attention, the others won't mistake this as favoritism. Second, they won't think the player is breaking the social contract by acting against the party.
Of course, giving your players a heads-up and asking for input doesn't necessarily mean revealing all your secret details. The discussion should give just enough forewarning to the players that you and this particular player are doing something secret with the character. You should probably mention the following:
* The player wants their character to secretly engage in some villainous activity, but not in direct opposition or in a way that would result in PVP.
* You want everyone else's in-game characters to act as though unaware of this information.
* You think this is a good idea because it advances the plot in an interesting way.
Then listen to what the other players think about this proposal. If they're all on board, then you may just be able to pull this off. Maybe they'll be open to PVP and you can discuss terms of engagement that supports competition between characters without hostility between players. Otherwise you should reconsider what kinds of twists and secrets you want in this game. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | ### Discuss it among the players first.
Surprise twist villains always sound really interesting in theory, but in practice they tend to backfire explosively when mishandled. I've been in campaigns where this happens. I've run (and ruined) my own campaigns by trying this, even when I thought I was being careful and clever. Of course it's not *impossible* to implement a surprise villain without breaking the game or alienating the players, but it's very risky and it warrants some level of out-of-game communication.
As you mentioned, your session zero didn't cover any rules for handling PVP which means antagonistic play isn't currently part of the social contract. It was acknowledged that PVP may occur, but not how it would manifest and what the boundaries are drawn. You may have players who really don't want PVP, and may feel betrayed (as real-world players, not as in-game characters) when suddenly their cooperative adventure turns into a a hostile PVP scenario, and they realize they aren't playing the game they signed up for.
From your perspective, you may be worried about spoiling your big surprise. But there's nothing inherently bad or good with plot twists. If you are concerned about risking player group cohesion, then perhaps maintaining the players' experience should take priority over trying to surprise them.
By communicating with the other players about your plans, you can accomplish 2 very important things that can help you execute your intended villain plot. First, when you give the secret villain character special attention, the others won't mistake this as favoritism. Second, they won't think the player is breaking the social contract by acting against the party.
Of course, giving your players a heads-up and asking for input doesn't necessarily mean revealing all your secret details. The discussion should give just enough forewarning to the players that you and this particular player are doing something secret with the character. You should probably mention the following:
* The player wants their character to secretly engage in some villainous activity, but not in direct opposition or in a way that would result in PVP.
* You want everyone else's in-game characters to act as though unaware of this information.
* You think this is a good idea because it advances the plot in an interesting way.
Then listen to what the other players think about this proposal. If they're all on board, then you may just be able to pull this off. Maybe they'll be open to PVP and you can discuss terms of engagement that supports competition between characters without hostility between players. Otherwise you should reconsider what kinds of twists and secrets you want in this game. | ### What you are describing doesn't sound like a twist, but rather a secret. Treating it like a twist may be problematic
I need to point out upfront that, while I have written many twist outros for PC characters, I've never had to actually execute one. What I *do* have good experience with, and what I believe is most relevant to this situation, is setting up and executing plot twists in general. **The major issue is that twists are difficult to do well, and difficulties around a PC's involvement in one pale in comparison to that.**
A proper twist in a plot is what happens when, after new information is revealed, that information gives a different context to events such that what *seemed* to be true about the plot before clearly no longer is: the twist demands that events the audience has observed and *thought* they understood before be looked at in a new light with new implications.
It's that reflection on old events that makes it a twist. Otherwise, it's just new information. I cannot emphasize enough that **revelations are not necessarily twists.** Eventually you can end up in a situation like "that's not a twist. That's a completely different movie about a talking dog voiced by Dolph Lundgren!".
And that's where it sounds like your game is right now. This PC will be fully involved in all aspects of full-party play, is not working against the party but rather is pursuing their own goals for their own reasons, and will have access to extra plot information but can't share it *and* still won't know what's going on in the story. Further, their secret role in the plot will likely be tangential enough (as they won't oppose the party or become the BBEG) that the reveal will explain what has happened in the story, but won't require revision of any previous understanding of events. That may be a denouement, and even a good one, but **it's not a twist.**
---
### OK, then, let's twist! But how?
My approach to twist-style stories is to work out the following:
* What is the twist intended to be?
* What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?
* What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?
* How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?
* How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?
* What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?
From what I've read in the question, the twisty PC working for a bad guy as a second job in their off-time, while not altering the rest of the party's activities at all and without becoming a significant antagonist doesn't sound like it can satisfy the bullet points. That may be *part* of the twist, but isn't enough on its own. It's the difference between
>
> We've investigated seven murders. The victims were killed by someone, and it turns out... it was Ted! On Carol's orders! Now we have to deal with Carol and maybe Ted also, so that's what we'll be doing for our next quest.
>
>
>
and
>
> We've investigated seven murders, and the evidence pointed towards Sarah. We dealt with her, but it turns out that the killer was Ted all along! He framed Sarah on Carol's orders, because Sarah was preventing Carol from executing her Ultimate Evil Plan but Carol didn't dare move against Sarah on her own. We thought we were solving the crimes and helping the city, but we turned out to be unknowing accomplices in the crimes and brought the entire world to the brink of doom!
>
>
>
It takes a lot of planning and work to prepare and execute a story like the latter in an even remotely fair way, and a huge amount of effort and skill on the twisty PC's part to pull it off. Specific, pre-planned events with specific, pre-planned details are much, *much* easier than improvising.
A player wanting a twisty PC might be OK (I don't think that every player can handle it well), but the twist elements still need to be present: the reveal still has to be meaningful, the PC's actions still need a superficially satisfying, innocent explanation, and the twist has to re-cast the PC's actions in a new light. Those seem hard to do with all of the constraints listed in the question at once, so relaxing some of those may be the best advice I can give in allowing a twist to revolve around this PC.
---
### An applied example
I'm running a campaign right now with a planned plot twist: the PCs have met a major NPC with a private army who is involved in what is, at minimum, a triple-cross in pursuit of a secret goal. Working with him is meant to seem easy and rewarding, but probably at least somewhat villainous. Working against him is meant to seem noble and difficult, but almost certainly heroic. The twist is that the NPC wants a large-scale military conflict, and doesn't care at all if his army wins or loses, or even what the fight is about. Regardless of whether the players choose to join with the NPC *or* oppose him, they will be advancing his secret plans. They have chances to figure out what's happening in advance but are unlikely to learn the truth until it's too late. So let's look at my checklist for this example:
* *What is the twist intended to be?*
The NPC has evil plans on a scale the players are unlikely to consider so early in the game, and has arranged events such that (almost) no matter what the players choose to do in that plotline they will be helping him.
* *What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC needs a lot of people to die violently, in a relatively short period of time, so that he can become immortal. He wants immortality because he's made a deal with a devil, and if he never dies he never has to pay his end of the bargain. He has been covertly stoking military tensions in hopes of starting a war in which his army can participate, but his goals don't require outcomes which might be expected (like his forces surviving, or his nation winning the war).
* *What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC seems like a simple warmonger, building conventional military strength to impose a military hegemony on the region (with him in charge). There are lots of fine-grained details that support this reading, but it's a common enough setup that it will be easy to get my players thinking on this track.
* *How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?*
Lots of campaign-specific ways, which go outside of the scope of describing how I'm trying to incorporate this twist.
* *How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?*
They've been traveling with the NPC and his army for a while and have observed clues firsthand. They will find that quests (major and minor) put them in the path of this plot until the first major arc of the campaign is finished. They have several reasons to find working with the NPC attractive, and lots of reasons to oppose him. The details about what he's really up to are on less obvious story paths and other NPCs will generally be certain that the mundane conquer-the-continent plan is what's happening. This is valuable because they will articulate goals and give out quests which support that interpretation.
* *What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?*
The PCs have met soldiers in the NPC's army, good and bad, and might care if they live or die. Either way, they are also being encouraged to form opinions about the polities in the game and might care about who comes out on top of an ordinary military struggle. Finally, the NPC's real goals will greatly advance the end of the world. My aim is to provide opportunities to care about individuals, societies, and the world itself to emphasize how evil the NPC truly is, and how selfish and destructive his schemes are. Ideally, they will be horrified at how deftly manipulated they were, and this will drive future conflict with other manipulative, ethically-not-awesome NPCs as the campaign progresses. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | ### Discuss it among the players first.
Surprise twist villains always sound really interesting in theory, but in practice they tend to backfire explosively when mishandled. I've been in campaigns where this happens. I've run (and ruined) my own campaigns by trying this, even when I thought I was being careful and clever. Of course it's not *impossible* to implement a surprise villain without breaking the game or alienating the players, but it's very risky and it warrants some level of out-of-game communication.
As you mentioned, your session zero didn't cover any rules for handling PVP which means antagonistic play isn't currently part of the social contract. It was acknowledged that PVP may occur, but not how it would manifest and what the boundaries are drawn. You may have players who really don't want PVP, and may feel betrayed (as real-world players, not as in-game characters) when suddenly their cooperative adventure turns into a a hostile PVP scenario, and they realize they aren't playing the game they signed up for.
From your perspective, you may be worried about spoiling your big surprise. But there's nothing inherently bad or good with plot twists. If you are concerned about risking player group cohesion, then perhaps maintaining the players' experience should take priority over trying to surprise them.
By communicating with the other players about your plans, you can accomplish 2 very important things that can help you execute your intended villain plot. First, when you give the secret villain character special attention, the others won't mistake this as favoritism. Second, they won't think the player is breaking the social contract by acting against the party.
Of course, giving your players a heads-up and asking for input doesn't necessarily mean revealing all your secret details. The discussion should give just enough forewarning to the players that you and this particular player are doing something secret with the character. You should probably mention the following:
* The player wants their character to secretly engage in some villainous activity, but not in direct opposition or in a way that would result in PVP.
* You want everyone else's in-game characters to act as though unaware of this information.
* You think this is a good idea because it advances the plot in an interesting way.
Then listen to what the other players think about this proposal. If they're all on board, then you may just be able to pull this off. Maybe they'll be open to PVP and you can discuss terms of engagement that supports competition between characters without hostility between players. Otherwise you should reconsider what kinds of twists and secrets you want in this game. | I would say, if you can GM it and he can play it really well, in the sense that it would be consistent and make sense for what's already known about the character and situation, that the character has their own agenda and is up to things that make sense, and has a reason for being in their position/relationships with the other PCs, etc, that it could be great... BUT that does not seem to be the case, or you would not be asking this question in this way.
If you can at least think of the reasons why this would not make sense and be consistent, then you might explain those to the player.
Like Dan B, I think the glaring larger problem is that there seem to be no developing situations or adversaries. You call that "plot", but from my perspective as a GM who runs dynamic campaigns, I suspect that framing those things as "plot" and "central adversaries" and not seeing/recognizing those things in the premade adventure, you and the players are not ending up with a sense of developing situations and adversaries... because you are all used to them being artificially planned and handed out, instead of found naturally during play.
Some tips:
* Pretty much all worlds and situations can have lots of "villains" and situations if they have people in them. Whoever the authorities, outlaws, and people who crave wealth and power, or who are just nasty people, are in the world, can potentially be villains, adversaries, opponents, etc., to the players, even ones they randomly encounter or notice (or who notice them) while they're walking through a town.
* In any situation, think about the NPCs, whether already opponents or just bystanders, who might take advantage of that situation in ways that may get the players' attention. Thieves, people who inform on what they observe of the PCs, and combat opponents who don't just fight to the death but flee and get away (possibly snagging something from the PCs if they can first) or live to fight another day, can/will all get player attention and curiosity and become "recurring villains" of a sort.
* Mention incidental details a lot, to conjure for the players that the world is an interesting place with consistent/real details, and allow the players to choose freely to investigate or ignore any of them.
* Don't over-explain or make too obvious what NPCs/situations/things in the game world you have detailed in advance or consider to be significant, or why things are the way they are. Just tell them what their PCs observe, including unimportant things, so that it's up to them to choose what to investigate or interact with. Act as if it could all be fun and interesting to mess around with.
If you make it obvious what's planned and significant and what's not, it can make the world seem bland and uninteresting.
* Notice and respond to what the players choose to investigate and interact with, and indulge those interests. Develop them and things like and related to them between sessions. In that way, the players can naturally discover and let you know what they're interested in, and find interesting things, and before you know it, related situations and interesting antagonists tend to emerge.
For example, I was running a simple wilderness monster hunting scenario, when the players randomly encountered a group of savages in ambush. The party had a standard practice of scouting carefully as they traveled, so I set up the situation on a sketch map and rolls determined they spotted the ambush at a distance. I made reaction rolls and the players decided to go talk to the savages. They didn't share a language but were friendly enough, and I did not meta-signal to the players that this was a random encounter. They decided to try to get information from and about the savages (of which I had nothing prepared, so I improvised). During the conversation, the players decided to try to trade with the natives, and found the natives had some scavenged minor valuables that they didn't value much. So when the party returned to civilization to resupply and heal, they also stocked up on things the natives were interested in, to trade with them. Then they went back and found the savages, by which time I had developed the savages and figured out how they related to the hunted monsters and other tribes, etc, and the situation developed more and more from there, following the players' choices and interests.
Another possible idea that I've seen work well with players who embraced it: You might have the player, or some other person not with the group, become an "adversary" player, not playing a PC in the group, but choosing what some other agents in the campaign are up to. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | I've both DMed surprise villain PCs (two of them!) and played the surprise villain PC myself, over multiple D&D 4e campaigns. Based on those experiences, I recommend the following:
Ground Rules With Your Villainous Player
----------------------------------------
Before starting on this plot, lay down some ground rules with your villainous player based on your group's tolerance for various "degrees" of villainy. For example, if you think your players might like the narrative idea of a villain PC, but don't want PVP, then one ground rule is that your villainous player can be a villain but must never instigate PVP. Similarly, if there are taboo topics at your table, such as torture, your villainous player must agree to never broach those topics, even in villainy.
If you're concerned that your villainous player will (or does) suffer from My Guy Syndrome, however, I strongly recommend against letting them play a villain PC at all. It's very easy for even the most well-intentioned MGS player to succumb to their syndrome and cause problems. Consider this player's past table behavior and whether they've shown signs of MGS. If so, it's likely not worth the risk. On the other hand, if they have a history of working with the group in the interest of a fun and exciting story for everyone, they're an excellent candidate.
Foreshadow, Foreshadow, Foreshadow
----------------------------------
@mikeq's answer recommends telling your players up front about your surprise. This is a good general suggestion if you're about to do something narratively that you aren't sure the players will enjoy. Based on your additional contextual points, it sounds like this *might* be something your players would be interested in. So **there's a middle ground between telling your players everything (and ruining the surprise), and hiding everything (and risking an unpleasant surprise).**
[Foreshadowing](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing), if you aren't familiar with the term, is a "clue or allusion embedded in the narrative that predicts some later event or revelation." In other words, **it's a hint at the direction of the plot which you can use to gauge your players' reactions to the planned twist.** Now, especially in a tabletop RPG, you need to be ten times as blatant about your foreshadowing as a typical movie or novel - your players are holding a lot more in their heads and it's easy to miss a single subtle clue. **Work with your villain-PC to establish lots of potential foreshadowing options,** such as being away mysteriously right at the same time an NPC winds up dead, or mysterious letters arriving which the PC hides from the other party members, or notable but ambiguous evidence left behind at the crime scene (E.g., your villain-PC is a tabaxi? There's cat fur at the scene. Suspicious, but not definite proof).
Mind Your Players' Reactions
----------------------------
This is a shared responsibility between you and your villainous player. **Both of you must watch your players' reactions closely to all the foreshadowing you drop.** I say this is partially your villainous player's responsibility because when I played the villain-PC, I spent quite a bit of time monitoring my fellow players' reactions to the hints I was dropping. If I dropped what I thought was a vital hint and got absolutely zero response, I would often drop another hint, just to make sure it was picked up on by *someone*. On the flip side, it's also your villainous player's responsibility to make sure they aren't hogging the limelight. You as the GM have some responsibility here as well, but given how many other responsibilities the GM has, you need your villainous player's full support.
**You're looking for hints about how well the other PCs will take this news.** If your players eagerly latch on to your foreshadowing hints, and speculate enthusiastically about the mystery villain's identity (bonus points if they actually suspect each other and seem to like the idea), great! Carry on. If, instead, your players express doubt or concern about the possibility that this villain might be one of their own, then abort mission and start over. Which leads into my next point:
Be Willing to Bail
------------------
The nice thing about TTRPGs is that you as the GM can change the direction of your plot as much as you feel is necessary for the whole table's enjoyment. **If you foreshadow this twist and get a strongly negative, or even just lukewarm, reaction: *reconsider***. Discuss it out of game with your villainous player, to make sure you're both on the same page and seeing the same reactions consistently (i.e., that it's not simply that the other players aren't picking up your foreshadowing). But make it clear to your villainous player before you start that if the other players don't seem to like the idea, you're going to retcon it away. Similarly, be ready to pull the plug if the villainous player starts coming down with My Guy Syndrome, or breaks any of the ground rules laid out before starting.
I've fortunately never had to retcon a villainous PC, but I've had to retcon a few other things which ended up not working out the way I wanted, and it's always better to do so than to push forward with an idea most or all of the group doesn't enjoy. | ### Discuss it among the players first.
Surprise twist villains always sound really interesting in theory, but in practice they tend to backfire explosively when mishandled. I've been in campaigns where this happens. I've run (and ruined) my own campaigns by trying this, even when I thought I was being careful and clever. Of course it's not *impossible* to implement a surprise villain without breaking the game or alienating the players, but it's very risky and it warrants some level of out-of-game communication.
As you mentioned, your session zero didn't cover any rules for handling PVP which means antagonistic play isn't currently part of the social contract. It was acknowledged that PVP may occur, but not how it would manifest and what the boundaries are drawn. You may have players who really don't want PVP, and may feel betrayed (as real-world players, not as in-game characters) when suddenly their cooperative adventure turns into a a hostile PVP scenario, and they realize they aren't playing the game they signed up for.
From your perspective, you may be worried about spoiling your big surprise. But there's nothing inherently bad or good with plot twists. If you are concerned about risking player group cohesion, then perhaps maintaining the players' experience should take priority over trying to surprise them.
By communicating with the other players about your plans, you can accomplish 2 very important things that can help you execute your intended villain plot. First, when you give the secret villain character special attention, the others won't mistake this as favoritism. Second, they won't think the player is breaking the social contract by acting against the party.
Of course, giving your players a heads-up and asking for input doesn't necessarily mean revealing all your secret details. The discussion should give just enough forewarning to the players that you and this particular player are doing something secret with the character. You should probably mention the following:
* The player wants their character to secretly engage in some villainous activity, but not in direct opposition or in a way that would result in PVP.
* You want everyone else's in-game characters to act as though unaware of this information.
* You think this is a good idea because it advances the plot in an interesting way.
Then listen to what the other players think about this proposal. If they're all on board, then you may just be able to pull this off. Maybe they'll be open to PVP and you can discuss terms of engagement that supports competition between characters without hostility between players. Otherwise you should reconsider what kinds of twists and secrets you want in this game. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | You've told us:
* your group is playing in a premade campaign that doesn't really have enough plot
* your group is unhappy because there's not enough plot
* one of your players is proposing to make their character secretly-a-villain in order to generate some plot
It seems to me that your problem is not "how can I handle a character being secretly-a-villain?" Your problem is "how can I get my campaign to have some plot?".
---
It sounds like you're already aware that letting a character be secretly-a-villain is risky. In my games, when I've allowed one character to be secretly-a-villain, it turned out pretty badly.
Here's my story: I ran an adventure in which one character had a demon inside him, and if it went unbound, he would turn evil and rampage. At one point the demon went unbound, and the player turned to me happily and said: "Now? I *rampage*." I immediately recognized that letting him rampage properly would lead to a TPK for the party and a Bad End for the campaign, so I improvised some rampage mechanics for him that didn't do anything effective, and I think the whole table was disappointed with how it turned out.
Here's [a story](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88094/) where something very similar happened. A secretly-a-villain player writes:
>
> I know NOW that I wasn't totally meant to destroy the party THIS TIME. Had the Paladin dead to rights (webbed, grappled by a Drider) at the business end of a Disintegrate spell, when the DM looked at me and went, "Huh. Sorry, I can't allow it."
>
>
>
Phrasing that more abstractly: when you allow one of your players to play an evil character, you are *giving them narrative license to try to wreck your story*.
The player will try to generate story outcomes that the other players won't like -- either directly killing other players' characters, or merely preventing them from accomplishing their goals. And then you'll be forced to adjudicate the situation. You'll have to decide which of your players gets stuck with an unsatisfying outcome where their character fails.
If you really want to do this (and my advice is: seriously don't), you need to think really carefully about what you're going to do, when the villain character attempts to do something that will make the rest of the group fail and lose. Will you let them do it and end the campaign with a defeat for the group? Or will you invoke DM fiat, like in the two situations above, and tell them they're just not allowed to do that?
---
Here's my recommendation for your adventure: don't start messing with secretly-a-villain characters. It wouldn't solve your problem very well and in fact you would then have two problems. Instead, alter the campaign and introduce an NPC villain. You could introduce a villainous organization, or just a recurring villain who's really hard to kill permanently. That will solve your group's problem, and it will also remove the reason why your player wants to be secretly-a-villain. | ### What you are describing doesn't sound like a twist, but rather a secret. Treating it like a twist may be problematic
I need to point out upfront that, while I have written many twist outros for PC characters, I've never had to actually execute one. What I *do* have good experience with, and what I believe is most relevant to this situation, is setting up and executing plot twists in general. **The major issue is that twists are difficult to do well, and difficulties around a PC's involvement in one pale in comparison to that.**
A proper twist in a plot is what happens when, after new information is revealed, that information gives a different context to events such that what *seemed* to be true about the plot before clearly no longer is: the twist demands that events the audience has observed and *thought* they understood before be looked at in a new light with new implications.
It's that reflection on old events that makes it a twist. Otherwise, it's just new information. I cannot emphasize enough that **revelations are not necessarily twists.** Eventually you can end up in a situation like "that's not a twist. That's a completely different movie about a talking dog voiced by Dolph Lundgren!".
And that's where it sounds like your game is right now. This PC will be fully involved in all aspects of full-party play, is not working against the party but rather is pursuing their own goals for their own reasons, and will have access to extra plot information but can't share it *and* still won't know what's going on in the story. Further, their secret role in the plot will likely be tangential enough (as they won't oppose the party or become the BBEG) that the reveal will explain what has happened in the story, but won't require revision of any previous understanding of events. That may be a denouement, and even a good one, but **it's not a twist.**
---
### OK, then, let's twist! But how?
My approach to twist-style stories is to work out the following:
* What is the twist intended to be?
* What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?
* What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?
* How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?
* How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?
* What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?
From what I've read in the question, the twisty PC working for a bad guy as a second job in their off-time, while not altering the rest of the party's activities at all and without becoming a significant antagonist doesn't sound like it can satisfy the bullet points. That may be *part* of the twist, but isn't enough on its own. It's the difference between
>
> We've investigated seven murders. The victims were killed by someone, and it turns out... it was Ted! On Carol's orders! Now we have to deal with Carol and maybe Ted also, so that's what we'll be doing for our next quest.
>
>
>
and
>
> We've investigated seven murders, and the evidence pointed towards Sarah. We dealt with her, but it turns out that the killer was Ted all along! He framed Sarah on Carol's orders, because Sarah was preventing Carol from executing her Ultimate Evil Plan but Carol didn't dare move against Sarah on her own. We thought we were solving the crimes and helping the city, but we turned out to be unknowing accomplices in the crimes and brought the entire world to the brink of doom!
>
>
>
It takes a lot of planning and work to prepare and execute a story like the latter in an even remotely fair way, and a huge amount of effort and skill on the twisty PC's part to pull it off. Specific, pre-planned events with specific, pre-planned details are much, *much* easier than improvising.
A player wanting a twisty PC might be OK (I don't think that every player can handle it well), but the twist elements still need to be present: the reveal still has to be meaningful, the PC's actions still need a superficially satisfying, innocent explanation, and the twist has to re-cast the PC's actions in a new light. Those seem hard to do with all of the constraints listed in the question at once, so relaxing some of those may be the best advice I can give in allowing a twist to revolve around this PC.
---
### An applied example
I'm running a campaign right now with a planned plot twist: the PCs have met a major NPC with a private army who is involved in what is, at minimum, a triple-cross in pursuit of a secret goal. Working with him is meant to seem easy and rewarding, but probably at least somewhat villainous. Working against him is meant to seem noble and difficult, but almost certainly heroic. The twist is that the NPC wants a large-scale military conflict, and doesn't care at all if his army wins or loses, or even what the fight is about. Regardless of whether the players choose to join with the NPC *or* oppose him, they will be advancing his secret plans. They have chances to figure out what's happening in advance but are unlikely to learn the truth until it's too late. So let's look at my checklist for this example:
* *What is the twist intended to be?*
The NPC has evil plans on a scale the players are unlikely to consider so early in the game, and has arranged events such that (almost) no matter what the players choose to do in that plotline they will be helping him.
* *What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC needs a lot of people to die violently, in a relatively short period of time, so that he can become immortal. He wants immortality because he's made a deal with a devil, and if he never dies he never has to pay his end of the bargain. He has been covertly stoking military tensions in hopes of starting a war in which his army can participate, but his goals don't require outcomes which might be expected (like his forces surviving, or his nation winning the war).
* *What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC seems like a simple warmonger, building conventional military strength to impose a military hegemony on the region (with him in charge). There are lots of fine-grained details that support this reading, but it's a common enough setup that it will be easy to get my players thinking on this track.
* *How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?*
Lots of campaign-specific ways, which go outside of the scope of describing how I'm trying to incorporate this twist.
* *How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?*
They've been traveling with the NPC and his army for a while and have observed clues firsthand. They will find that quests (major and minor) put them in the path of this plot until the first major arc of the campaign is finished. They have several reasons to find working with the NPC attractive, and lots of reasons to oppose him. The details about what he's really up to are on less obvious story paths and other NPCs will generally be certain that the mundane conquer-the-continent plan is what's happening. This is valuable because they will articulate goals and give out quests which support that interpretation.
* *What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?*
The PCs have met soldiers in the NPC's army, good and bad, and might care if they live or die. Either way, they are also being encouraged to form opinions about the polities in the game and might care about who comes out on top of an ordinary military struggle. Finally, the NPC's real goals will greatly advance the end of the world. My aim is to provide opportunities to care about individuals, societies, and the world itself to emphasize how evil the NPC truly is, and how selfish and destructive his schemes are. Ideally, they will be horrified at how deftly manipulated they were, and this will drive future conflict with other manipulative, ethically-not-awesome NPCs as the campaign progresses. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | You've told us:
* your group is playing in a premade campaign that doesn't really have enough plot
* your group is unhappy because there's not enough plot
* one of your players is proposing to make their character secretly-a-villain in order to generate some plot
It seems to me that your problem is not "how can I handle a character being secretly-a-villain?" Your problem is "how can I get my campaign to have some plot?".
---
It sounds like you're already aware that letting a character be secretly-a-villain is risky. In my games, when I've allowed one character to be secretly-a-villain, it turned out pretty badly.
Here's my story: I ran an adventure in which one character had a demon inside him, and if it went unbound, he would turn evil and rampage. At one point the demon went unbound, and the player turned to me happily and said: "Now? I *rampage*." I immediately recognized that letting him rampage properly would lead to a TPK for the party and a Bad End for the campaign, so I improvised some rampage mechanics for him that didn't do anything effective, and I think the whole table was disappointed with how it turned out.
Here's [a story](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88094/) where something very similar happened. A secretly-a-villain player writes:
>
> I know NOW that I wasn't totally meant to destroy the party THIS TIME. Had the Paladin dead to rights (webbed, grappled by a Drider) at the business end of a Disintegrate spell, when the DM looked at me and went, "Huh. Sorry, I can't allow it."
>
>
>
Phrasing that more abstractly: when you allow one of your players to play an evil character, you are *giving them narrative license to try to wreck your story*.
The player will try to generate story outcomes that the other players won't like -- either directly killing other players' characters, or merely preventing them from accomplishing their goals. And then you'll be forced to adjudicate the situation. You'll have to decide which of your players gets stuck with an unsatisfying outcome where their character fails.
If you really want to do this (and my advice is: seriously don't), you need to think really carefully about what you're going to do, when the villain character attempts to do something that will make the rest of the group fail and lose. Will you let them do it and end the campaign with a defeat for the group? Or will you invoke DM fiat, like in the two situations above, and tell them they're just not allowed to do that?
---
Here's my recommendation for your adventure: don't start messing with secretly-a-villain characters. It wouldn't solve your problem very well and in fact you would then have two problems. Instead, alter the campaign and introduce an NPC villain. You could introduce a villainous organization, or just a recurring villain who's really hard to kill permanently. That will solve your group's problem, and it will also remove the reason why your player wants to be secretly-a-villain. | I would say, if you can GM it and he can play it really well, in the sense that it would be consistent and make sense for what's already known about the character and situation, that the character has their own agenda and is up to things that make sense, and has a reason for being in their position/relationships with the other PCs, etc, that it could be great... BUT that does not seem to be the case, or you would not be asking this question in this way.
If you can at least think of the reasons why this would not make sense and be consistent, then you might explain those to the player.
Like Dan B, I think the glaring larger problem is that there seem to be no developing situations or adversaries. You call that "plot", but from my perspective as a GM who runs dynamic campaigns, I suspect that framing those things as "plot" and "central adversaries" and not seeing/recognizing those things in the premade adventure, you and the players are not ending up with a sense of developing situations and adversaries... because you are all used to them being artificially planned and handed out, instead of found naturally during play.
Some tips:
* Pretty much all worlds and situations can have lots of "villains" and situations if they have people in them. Whoever the authorities, outlaws, and people who crave wealth and power, or who are just nasty people, are in the world, can potentially be villains, adversaries, opponents, etc., to the players, even ones they randomly encounter or notice (or who notice them) while they're walking through a town.
* In any situation, think about the NPCs, whether already opponents or just bystanders, who might take advantage of that situation in ways that may get the players' attention. Thieves, people who inform on what they observe of the PCs, and combat opponents who don't just fight to the death but flee and get away (possibly snagging something from the PCs if they can first) or live to fight another day, can/will all get player attention and curiosity and become "recurring villains" of a sort.
* Mention incidental details a lot, to conjure for the players that the world is an interesting place with consistent/real details, and allow the players to choose freely to investigate or ignore any of them.
* Don't over-explain or make too obvious what NPCs/situations/things in the game world you have detailed in advance or consider to be significant, or why things are the way they are. Just tell them what their PCs observe, including unimportant things, so that it's up to them to choose what to investigate or interact with. Act as if it could all be fun and interesting to mess around with.
If you make it obvious what's planned and significant and what's not, it can make the world seem bland and uninteresting.
* Notice and respond to what the players choose to investigate and interact with, and indulge those interests. Develop them and things like and related to them between sessions. In that way, the players can naturally discover and let you know what they're interested in, and find interesting things, and before you know it, related situations and interesting antagonists tend to emerge.
For example, I was running a simple wilderness monster hunting scenario, when the players randomly encountered a group of savages in ambush. The party had a standard practice of scouting carefully as they traveled, so I set up the situation on a sketch map and rolls determined they spotted the ambush at a distance. I made reaction rolls and the players decided to go talk to the savages. They didn't share a language but were friendly enough, and I did not meta-signal to the players that this was a random encounter. They decided to try to get information from and about the savages (of which I had nothing prepared, so I improvised). During the conversation, the players decided to try to trade with the natives, and found the natives had some scavenged minor valuables that they didn't value much. So when the party returned to civilization to resupply and heal, they also stocked up on things the natives were interested in, to trade with them. Then they went back and found the savages, by which time I had developed the savages and figured out how they related to the hunted monsters and other tribes, etc, and the situation developed more and more from there, following the players' choices and interests.
Another possible idea that I've seen work well with players who embraced it: You might have the player, or some other person not with the group, become an "adversary" player, not playing a PC in the group, but choosing what some other agents in the campaign are up to. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | I've both DMed surprise villain PCs (two of them!) and played the surprise villain PC myself, over multiple D&D 4e campaigns. Based on those experiences, I recommend the following:
Ground Rules With Your Villainous Player
----------------------------------------
Before starting on this plot, lay down some ground rules with your villainous player based on your group's tolerance for various "degrees" of villainy. For example, if you think your players might like the narrative idea of a villain PC, but don't want PVP, then one ground rule is that your villainous player can be a villain but must never instigate PVP. Similarly, if there are taboo topics at your table, such as torture, your villainous player must agree to never broach those topics, even in villainy.
If you're concerned that your villainous player will (or does) suffer from My Guy Syndrome, however, I strongly recommend against letting them play a villain PC at all. It's very easy for even the most well-intentioned MGS player to succumb to their syndrome and cause problems. Consider this player's past table behavior and whether they've shown signs of MGS. If so, it's likely not worth the risk. On the other hand, if they have a history of working with the group in the interest of a fun and exciting story for everyone, they're an excellent candidate.
Foreshadow, Foreshadow, Foreshadow
----------------------------------
@mikeq's answer recommends telling your players up front about your surprise. This is a good general suggestion if you're about to do something narratively that you aren't sure the players will enjoy. Based on your additional contextual points, it sounds like this *might* be something your players would be interested in. So **there's a middle ground between telling your players everything (and ruining the surprise), and hiding everything (and risking an unpleasant surprise).**
[Foreshadowing](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing), if you aren't familiar with the term, is a "clue or allusion embedded in the narrative that predicts some later event or revelation." In other words, **it's a hint at the direction of the plot which you can use to gauge your players' reactions to the planned twist.** Now, especially in a tabletop RPG, you need to be ten times as blatant about your foreshadowing as a typical movie or novel - your players are holding a lot more in their heads and it's easy to miss a single subtle clue. **Work with your villain-PC to establish lots of potential foreshadowing options,** such as being away mysteriously right at the same time an NPC winds up dead, or mysterious letters arriving which the PC hides from the other party members, or notable but ambiguous evidence left behind at the crime scene (E.g., your villain-PC is a tabaxi? There's cat fur at the scene. Suspicious, but not definite proof).
Mind Your Players' Reactions
----------------------------
This is a shared responsibility between you and your villainous player. **Both of you must watch your players' reactions closely to all the foreshadowing you drop.** I say this is partially your villainous player's responsibility because when I played the villain-PC, I spent quite a bit of time monitoring my fellow players' reactions to the hints I was dropping. If I dropped what I thought was a vital hint and got absolutely zero response, I would often drop another hint, just to make sure it was picked up on by *someone*. On the flip side, it's also your villainous player's responsibility to make sure they aren't hogging the limelight. You as the GM have some responsibility here as well, but given how many other responsibilities the GM has, you need your villainous player's full support.
**You're looking for hints about how well the other PCs will take this news.** If your players eagerly latch on to your foreshadowing hints, and speculate enthusiastically about the mystery villain's identity (bonus points if they actually suspect each other and seem to like the idea), great! Carry on. If, instead, your players express doubt or concern about the possibility that this villain might be one of their own, then abort mission and start over. Which leads into my next point:
Be Willing to Bail
------------------
The nice thing about TTRPGs is that you as the GM can change the direction of your plot as much as you feel is necessary for the whole table's enjoyment. **If you foreshadow this twist and get a strongly negative, or even just lukewarm, reaction: *reconsider***. Discuss it out of game with your villainous player, to make sure you're both on the same page and seeing the same reactions consistently (i.e., that it's not simply that the other players aren't picking up your foreshadowing). But make it clear to your villainous player before you start that if the other players don't seem to like the idea, you're going to retcon it away. Similarly, be ready to pull the plug if the villainous player starts coming down with My Guy Syndrome, or breaks any of the ground rules laid out before starting.
I've fortunately never had to retcon a villainous PC, but I've had to retcon a few other things which ended up not working out the way I wanted, and it's always better to do so than to push forward with an idea most or all of the group doesn't enjoy. | You've told us:
* your group is playing in a premade campaign that doesn't really have enough plot
* your group is unhappy because there's not enough plot
* one of your players is proposing to make their character secretly-a-villain in order to generate some plot
It seems to me that your problem is not "how can I handle a character being secretly-a-villain?" Your problem is "how can I get my campaign to have some plot?".
---
It sounds like you're already aware that letting a character be secretly-a-villain is risky. In my games, when I've allowed one character to be secretly-a-villain, it turned out pretty badly.
Here's my story: I ran an adventure in which one character had a demon inside him, and if it went unbound, he would turn evil and rampage. At one point the demon went unbound, and the player turned to me happily and said: "Now? I *rampage*." I immediately recognized that letting him rampage properly would lead to a TPK for the party and a Bad End for the campaign, so I improvised some rampage mechanics for him that didn't do anything effective, and I think the whole table was disappointed with how it turned out.
Here's [a story](https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/88094/) where something very similar happened. A secretly-a-villain player writes:
>
> I know NOW that I wasn't totally meant to destroy the party THIS TIME. Had the Paladin dead to rights (webbed, grappled by a Drider) at the business end of a Disintegrate spell, when the DM looked at me and went, "Huh. Sorry, I can't allow it."
>
>
>
Phrasing that more abstractly: when you allow one of your players to play an evil character, you are *giving them narrative license to try to wreck your story*.
The player will try to generate story outcomes that the other players won't like -- either directly killing other players' characters, or merely preventing them from accomplishing their goals. And then you'll be forced to adjudicate the situation. You'll have to decide which of your players gets stuck with an unsatisfying outcome where their character fails.
If you really want to do this (and my advice is: seriously don't), you need to think really carefully about what you're going to do, when the villain character attempts to do something that will make the rest of the group fail and lose. Will you let them do it and end the campaign with a defeat for the group? Or will you invoke DM fiat, like in the two situations above, and tell them they're just not allowed to do that?
---
Here's my recommendation for your adventure: don't start messing with secretly-a-villain characters. It wouldn't solve your problem very well and in fact you would then have two problems. Instead, alter the campaign and introduce an NPC villain. You could introduce a villainous organization, or just a recurring villain who's really hard to kill permanently. That will solve your group's problem, and it will also remove the reason why your player wants to be secretly-a-villain. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | ### What you are describing doesn't sound like a twist, but rather a secret. Treating it like a twist may be problematic
I need to point out upfront that, while I have written many twist outros for PC characters, I've never had to actually execute one. What I *do* have good experience with, and what I believe is most relevant to this situation, is setting up and executing plot twists in general. **The major issue is that twists are difficult to do well, and difficulties around a PC's involvement in one pale in comparison to that.**
A proper twist in a plot is what happens when, after new information is revealed, that information gives a different context to events such that what *seemed* to be true about the plot before clearly no longer is: the twist demands that events the audience has observed and *thought* they understood before be looked at in a new light with new implications.
It's that reflection on old events that makes it a twist. Otherwise, it's just new information. I cannot emphasize enough that **revelations are not necessarily twists.** Eventually you can end up in a situation like "that's not a twist. That's a completely different movie about a talking dog voiced by Dolph Lundgren!".
And that's where it sounds like your game is right now. This PC will be fully involved in all aspects of full-party play, is not working against the party but rather is pursuing their own goals for their own reasons, and will have access to extra plot information but can't share it *and* still won't know what's going on in the story. Further, their secret role in the plot will likely be tangential enough (as they won't oppose the party or become the BBEG) that the reveal will explain what has happened in the story, but won't require revision of any previous understanding of events. That may be a denouement, and even a good one, but **it's not a twist.**
---
### OK, then, let's twist! But how?
My approach to twist-style stories is to work out the following:
* What is the twist intended to be?
* What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?
* What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?
* How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?
* How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?
* What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?
From what I've read in the question, the twisty PC working for a bad guy as a second job in their off-time, while not altering the rest of the party's activities at all and without becoming a significant antagonist doesn't sound like it can satisfy the bullet points. That may be *part* of the twist, but isn't enough on its own. It's the difference between
>
> We've investigated seven murders. The victims were killed by someone, and it turns out... it was Ted! On Carol's orders! Now we have to deal with Carol and maybe Ted also, so that's what we'll be doing for our next quest.
>
>
>
and
>
> We've investigated seven murders, and the evidence pointed towards Sarah. We dealt with her, but it turns out that the killer was Ted all along! He framed Sarah on Carol's orders, because Sarah was preventing Carol from executing her Ultimate Evil Plan but Carol didn't dare move against Sarah on her own. We thought we were solving the crimes and helping the city, but we turned out to be unknowing accomplices in the crimes and brought the entire world to the brink of doom!
>
>
>
It takes a lot of planning and work to prepare and execute a story like the latter in an even remotely fair way, and a huge amount of effort and skill on the twisty PC's part to pull it off. Specific, pre-planned events with specific, pre-planned details are much, *much* easier than improvising.
A player wanting a twisty PC might be OK (I don't think that every player can handle it well), but the twist elements still need to be present: the reveal still has to be meaningful, the PC's actions still need a superficially satisfying, innocent explanation, and the twist has to re-cast the PC's actions in a new light. Those seem hard to do with all of the constraints listed in the question at once, so relaxing some of those may be the best advice I can give in allowing a twist to revolve around this PC.
---
### An applied example
I'm running a campaign right now with a planned plot twist: the PCs have met a major NPC with a private army who is involved in what is, at minimum, a triple-cross in pursuit of a secret goal. Working with him is meant to seem easy and rewarding, but probably at least somewhat villainous. Working against him is meant to seem noble and difficult, but almost certainly heroic. The twist is that the NPC wants a large-scale military conflict, and doesn't care at all if his army wins or loses, or even what the fight is about. Regardless of whether the players choose to join with the NPC *or* oppose him, they will be advancing his secret plans. They have chances to figure out what's happening in advance but are unlikely to learn the truth until it's too late. So let's look at my checklist for this example:
* *What is the twist intended to be?*
The NPC has evil plans on a scale the players are unlikely to consider so early in the game, and has arranged events such that (almost) no matter what the players choose to do in that plotline they will be helping him.
* *What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC needs a lot of people to die violently, in a relatively short period of time, so that he can become immortal. He wants immortality because he's made a deal with a devil, and if he never dies he never has to pay his end of the bargain. He has been covertly stoking military tensions in hopes of starting a war in which his army can participate, but his goals don't require outcomes which might be expected (like his forces surviving, or his nation winning the war).
* *What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC seems like a simple warmonger, building conventional military strength to impose a military hegemony on the region (with him in charge). There are lots of fine-grained details that support this reading, but it's a common enough setup that it will be easy to get my players thinking on this track.
* *How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?*
Lots of campaign-specific ways, which go outside of the scope of describing how I'm trying to incorporate this twist.
* *How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?*
They've been traveling with the NPC and his army for a while and have observed clues firsthand. They will find that quests (major and minor) put them in the path of this plot until the first major arc of the campaign is finished. They have several reasons to find working with the NPC attractive, and lots of reasons to oppose him. The details about what he's really up to are on less obvious story paths and other NPCs will generally be certain that the mundane conquer-the-continent plan is what's happening. This is valuable because they will articulate goals and give out quests which support that interpretation.
* *What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?*
The PCs have met soldiers in the NPC's army, good and bad, and might care if they live or die. Either way, they are also being encouraged to form opinions about the polities in the game and might care about who comes out on top of an ordinary military struggle. Finally, the NPC's real goals will greatly advance the end of the world. My aim is to provide opportunities to care about individuals, societies, and the world itself to emphasize how evil the NPC truly is, and how selfish and destructive his schemes are. Ideally, they will be horrified at how deftly manipulated they were, and this will drive future conflict with other manipulative, ethically-not-awesome NPCs as the campaign progresses. | I would say, if you can GM it and he can play it really well, in the sense that it would be consistent and make sense for what's already known about the character and situation, that the character has their own agenda and is up to things that make sense, and has a reason for being in their position/relationships with the other PCs, etc, that it could be great... BUT that does not seem to be the case, or you would not be asking this question in this way.
If you can at least think of the reasons why this would not make sense and be consistent, then you might explain those to the player.
Like Dan B, I think the glaring larger problem is that there seem to be no developing situations or adversaries. You call that "plot", but from my perspective as a GM who runs dynamic campaigns, I suspect that framing those things as "plot" and "central adversaries" and not seeing/recognizing those things in the premade adventure, you and the players are not ending up with a sense of developing situations and adversaries... because you are all used to them being artificially planned and handed out, instead of found naturally during play.
Some tips:
* Pretty much all worlds and situations can have lots of "villains" and situations if they have people in them. Whoever the authorities, outlaws, and people who crave wealth and power, or who are just nasty people, are in the world, can potentially be villains, adversaries, opponents, etc., to the players, even ones they randomly encounter or notice (or who notice them) while they're walking through a town.
* In any situation, think about the NPCs, whether already opponents or just bystanders, who might take advantage of that situation in ways that may get the players' attention. Thieves, people who inform on what they observe of the PCs, and combat opponents who don't just fight to the death but flee and get away (possibly snagging something from the PCs if they can first) or live to fight another day, can/will all get player attention and curiosity and become "recurring villains" of a sort.
* Mention incidental details a lot, to conjure for the players that the world is an interesting place with consistent/real details, and allow the players to choose freely to investigate or ignore any of them.
* Don't over-explain or make too obvious what NPCs/situations/things in the game world you have detailed in advance or consider to be significant, or why things are the way they are. Just tell them what their PCs observe, including unimportant things, so that it's up to them to choose what to investigate or interact with. Act as if it could all be fun and interesting to mess around with.
If you make it obvious what's planned and significant and what's not, it can make the world seem bland and uninteresting.
* Notice and respond to what the players choose to investigate and interact with, and indulge those interests. Develop them and things like and related to them between sessions. In that way, the players can naturally discover and let you know what they're interested in, and find interesting things, and before you know it, related situations and interesting antagonists tend to emerge.
For example, I was running a simple wilderness monster hunting scenario, when the players randomly encountered a group of savages in ambush. The party had a standard practice of scouting carefully as they traveled, so I set up the situation on a sketch map and rolls determined they spotted the ambush at a distance. I made reaction rolls and the players decided to go talk to the savages. They didn't share a language but were friendly enough, and I did not meta-signal to the players that this was a random encounter. They decided to try to get information from and about the savages (of which I had nothing prepared, so I improvised). During the conversation, the players decided to try to trade with the natives, and found the natives had some scavenged minor valuables that they didn't value much. So when the party returned to civilization to resupply and heal, they also stocked up on things the natives were interested in, to trade with them. Then they went back and found the savages, by which time I had developed the savages and figured out how they related to the hunted monsters and other tribes, etc, and the situation developed more and more from there, following the players' choices and interests.
Another possible idea that I've seen work well with players who embraced it: You might have the player, or some other person not with the group, become an "adversary" player, not playing a PC in the group, but choosing what some other agents in the campaign are up to. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | I've both DMed surprise villain PCs (two of them!) and played the surprise villain PC myself, over multiple D&D 4e campaigns. Based on those experiences, I recommend the following:
Ground Rules With Your Villainous Player
----------------------------------------
Before starting on this plot, lay down some ground rules with your villainous player based on your group's tolerance for various "degrees" of villainy. For example, if you think your players might like the narrative idea of a villain PC, but don't want PVP, then one ground rule is that your villainous player can be a villain but must never instigate PVP. Similarly, if there are taboo topics at your table, such as torture, your villainous player must agree to never broach those topics, even in villainy.
If you're concerned that your villainous player will (or does) suffer from My Guy Syndrome, however, I strongly recommend against letting them play a villain PC at all. It's very easy for even the most well-intentioned MGS player to succumb to their syndrome and cause problems. Consider this player's past table behavior and whether they've shown signs of MGS. If so, it's likely not worth the risk. On the other hand, if they have a history of working with the group in the interest of a fun and exciting story for everyone, they're an excellent candidate.
Foreshadow, Foreshadow, Foreshadow
----------------------------------
@mikeq's answer recommends telling your players up front about your surprise. This is a good general suggestion if you're about to do something narratively that you aren't sure the players will enjoy. Based on your additional contextual points, it sounds like this *might* be something your players would be interested in. So **there's a middle ground between telling your players everything (and ruining the surprise), and hiding everything (and risking an unpleasant surprise).**
[Foreshadowing](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing), if you aren't familiar with the term, is a "clue or allusion embedded in the narrative that predicts some later event or revelation." In other words, **it's a hint at the direction of the plot which you can use to gauge your players' reactions to the planned twist.** Now, especially in a tabletop RPG, you need to be ten times as blatant about your foreshadowing as a typical movie or novel - your players are holding a lot more in their heads and it's easy to miss a single subtle clue. **Work with your villain-PC to establish lots of potential foreshadowing options,** such as being away mysteriously right at the same time an NPC winds up dead, or mysterious letters arriving which the PC hides from the other party members, or notable but ambiguous evidence left behind at the crime scene (E.g., your villain-PC is a tabaxi? There's cat fur at the scene. Suspicious, but not definite proof).
Mind Your Players' Reactions
----------------------------
This is a shared responsibility between you and your villainous player. **Both of you must watch your players' reactions closely to all the foreshadowing you drop.** I say this is partially your villainous player's responsibility because when I played the villain-PC, I spent quite a bit of time monitoring my fellow players' reactions to the hints I was dropping. If I dropped what I thought was a vital hint and got absolutely zero response, I would often drop another hint, just to make sure it was picked up on by *someone*. On the flip side, it's also your villainous player's responsibility to make sure they aren't hogging the limelight. You as the GM have some responsibility here as well, but given how many other responsibilities the GM has, you need your villainous player's full support.
**You're looking for hints about how well the other PCs will take this news.** If your players eagerly latch on to your foreshadowing hints, and speculate enthusiastically about the mystery villain's identity (bonus points if they actually suspect each other and seem to like the idea), great! Carry on. If, instead, your players express doubt or concern about the possibility that this villain might be one of their own, then abort mission and start over. Which leads into my next point:
Be Willing to Bail
------------------
The nice thing about TTRPGs is that you as the GM can change the direction of your plot as much as you feel is necessary for the whole table's enjoyment. **If you foreshadow this twist and get a strongly negative, or even just lukewarm, reaction: *reconsider***. Discuss it out of game with your villainous player, to make sure you're both on the same page and seeing the same reactions consistently (i.e., that it's not simply that the other players aren't picking up your foreshadowing). But make it clear to your villainous player before you start that if the other players don't seem to like the idea, you're going to retcon it away. Similarly, be ready to pull the plug if the villainous player starts coming down with My Guy Syndrome, or breaks any of the ground rules laid out before starting.
I've fortunately never had to retcon a villainous PC, but I've had to retcon a few other things which ended up not working out the way I wanted, and it's always better to do so than to push forward with an idea most or all of the group doesn't enjoy. | ### What you are describing doesn't sound like a twist, but rather a secret. Treating it like a twist may be problematic
I need to point out upfront that, while I have written many twist outros for PC characters, I've never had to actually execute one. What I *do* have good experience with, and what I believe is most relevant to this situation, is setting up and executing plot twists in general. **The major issue is that twists are difficult to do well, and difficulties around a PC's involvement in one pale in comparison to that.**
A proper twist in a plot is what happens when, after new information is revealed, that information gives a different context to events such that what *seemed* to be true about the plot before clearly no longer is: the twist demands that events the audience has observed and *thought* they understood before be looked at in a new light with new implications.
It's that reflection on old events that makes it a twist. Otherwise, it's just new information. I cannot emphasize enough that **revelations are not necessarily twists.** Eventually you can end up in a situation like "that's not a twist. That's a completely different movie about a talking dog voiced by Dolph Lundgren!".
And that's where it sounds like your game is right now. This PC will be fully involved in all aspects of full-party play, is not working against the party but rather is pursuing their own goals for their own reasons, and will have access to extra plot information but can't share it *and* still won't know what's going on in the story. Further, their secret role in the plot will likely be tangential enough (as they won't oppose the party or become the BBEG) that the reveal will explain what has happened in the story, but won't require revision of any previous understanding of events. That may be a denouement, and even a good one, but **it's not a twist.**
---
### OK, then, let's twist! But how?
My approach to twist-style stories is to work out the following:
* What is the twist intended to be?
* What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?
* What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?
* How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?
* How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?
* What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?
From what I've read in the question, the twisty PC working for a bad guy as a second job in their off-time, while not altering the rest of the party's activities at all and without becoming a significant antagonist doesn't sound like it can satisfy the bullet points. That may be *part* of the twist, but isn't enough on its own. It's the difference between
>
> We've investigated seven murders. The victims were killed by someone, and it turns out... it was Ted! On Carol's orders! Now we have to deal with Carol and maybe Ted also, so that's what we'll be doing for our next quest.
>
>
>
and
>
> We've investigated seven murders, and the evidence pointed towards Sarah. We dealt with her, but it turns out that the killer was Ted all along! He framed Sarah on Carol's orders, because Sarah was preventing Carol from executing her Ultimate Evil Plan but Carol didn't dare move against Sarah on her own. We thought we were solving the crimes and helping the city, but we turned out to be unknowing accomplices in the crimes and brought the entire world to the brink of doom!
>
>
>
It takes a lot of planning and work to prepare and execute a story like the latter in an even remotely fair way, and a huge amount of effort and skill on the twisty PC's part to pull it off. Specific, pre-planned events with specific, pre-planned details are much, *much* easier than improvising.
A player wanting a twisty PC might be OK (I don't think that every player can handle it well), but the twist elements still need to be present: the reveal still has to be meaningful, the PC's actions still need a superficially satisfying, innocent explanation, and the twist has to re-cast the PC's actions in a new light. Those seem hard to do with all of the constraints listed in the question at once, so relaxing some of those may be the best advice I can give in allowing a twist to revolve around this PC.
---
### An applied example
I'm running a campaign right now with a planned plot twist: the PCs have met a major NPC with a private army who is involved in what is, at minimum, a triple-cross in pursuit of a secret goal. Working with him is meant to seem easy and rewarding, but probably at least somewhat villainous. Working against him is meant to seem noble and difficult, but almost certainly heroic. The twist is that the NPC wants a large-scale military conflict, and doesn't care at all if his army wins or loses, or even what the fight is about. Regardless of whether the players choose to join with the NPC *or* oppose him, they will be advancing his secret plans. They have chances to figure out what's happening in advance but are unlikely to learn the truth until it's too late. So let's look at my checklist for this example:
* *What is the twist intended to be?*
The NPC has evil plans on a scale the players are unlikely to consider so early in the game, and has arranged events such that (almost) no matter what the players choose to do in that plotline they will be helping him.
* *What does the planned course of events in the campaign look like
with knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC needs a lot of people to die violently, in a relatively short period of time, so that he can become immortal. He wants immortality because he's made a deal with a devil, and if he never dies he never has to pay his end of the bargain. He has been covertly stoking military tensions in hopes of starting a war in which his army can participate, but his goals don't require outcomes which might be expected (like his forces surviving, or his nation winning the war).
* *What would a plausible, internally consistent story for those events
be like *without* knowledge of the twist?*
The NPC seems like a simple warmonger, building conventional military strength to impose a military hegemony on the region (with him in charge). There are lots of fine-grained details that support this reading, but it's a common enough setup that it will be easy to get my players thinking on this track.
* *How can PCs be connected to the apparent (that is to say, twist-less)
storyline?*
Lots of campaign-specific ways, which go outside of the scope of describing how I'm trying to incorporate this twist.
* *How can PCs be guided towards the *seeming* explanations for the
clues they find while not easily leaping to the true explanations?*
They've been traveling with the NPC and his army for a while and have observed clues firsthand. They will find that quests (major and minor) put them in the path of this plot until the first major arc of the campaign is finished. They have several reasons to find working with the NPC attractive, and lots of reasons to oppose him. The details about what he's really up to are on less obvious story paths and other NPCs will generally be certain that the mundane conquer-the-continent plan is what's happening. This is valuable because they will articulate goals and give out quests which support that interpretation.
* *What details can be presented to emphasize the impact that revealing
the twist has? Or put another way, what can be done to maximize the
contrast between the players' pre-reveal understanding of the story
and their post-reveal understanding?*
The PCs have met soldiers in the NPC's army, good and bad, and might care if they live or die. Either way, they are also being encouraged to form opinions about the polities in the game and might care about who comes out on top of an ordinary military struggle. Finally, the NPC's real goals will greatly advance the end of the world. My aim is to provide opportunities to care about individuals, societies, and the world itself to emphasize how evil the NPC truly is, and how selfish and destructive his schemes are. Ideally, they will be horrified at how deftly manipulated they were, and this will drive future conflict with other manipulative, ethically-not-awesome NPCs as the campaign progresses. |
177,251 | My group has been following a premade campaign that has a decentralized plot structure that relies mainly on adventurers "finding their own adventure". This means that while the campaign provides ample worldbuilding information and premade side-quests, the campaign has no clearly defined antagonist or central plotlines. Normally, in a group focused on exploration and combat this wouldn't be a big deal, however in my group there's been a general feeling of dissatisfaction at the current lack of plot progression, as well as the lack of a main antagonistic force.
In order to help develop a centralized plot, one of my players recently came up with the idea of his PC secretly acting as a twist villain. The basic premise is that they would conduct certain actions between sessions in secret (i.e. assassinating certain NPCs, instigating strife between factions, etc.), such that the other players would have mysteries to uncover, as well as a means of driving change in an otherwise stagnant story.
In order to prevent the player from gaining an unfair amount of agency and spotlight, the following would be enforced:
* The PC will not become "the BBEG". That is to say, they will never become the primary antagonistic force in the story. They will never work fully in opposition to the other PCs, but will follow goals that the other PCs may view as acts of evil.
* The PC's villainous acts will serve to develop a larger storyline. The PC will only be privy to information pertaining to their own actions; the player of said PC will not be aware of the overall direction of the story.
* The player has agreed to relinquish control of their character to me (the GM) in the event that cooperation between them and the rest of the party becomes impossible.
I've heard that PVP generally has a negative connotation and I have some concerns with the idea of a player having an elevated degree of control in the storyline, mostly related to spotlight issues. However twist villains appeal to me and I think that the other players will appreciate the resulting narrative shift.
RPG.SE has a vast array of experiences and I'm certain that this scenario has occurred before. I'm hoping to draw on that experience to help answer the following question: **how can I handle a PC wanting to be a twist villain**?
* What steps can I take to ensure that this doesn't come across as an act of favoritism?
* How can I prevent this from turning into an instance of "My Guy" syndrome?
* Are there any pitfalls of this choice that I may want to avoid?
Preferably, I'm interested in answers that ensure that the mystery surrounding the villains identity is preserved, while reducing any potential in-real-life strife.
---
Contextual points to consider:
* The group has historically responded well to story-driven adventures. Roleplaying abilities are generally strong and players expect the presence of heightened drama.
* When we started this campaign, we were aware that the campaign was more open-ended than others we've played in the past. It was selected as an experiment of sorts; needless to say the experiment has proven somewhat unsuccessful and everyone involved is aligned on the fact that the campaign requires a stronger storytelling backbone in order to remain interesting.
* Session Zero has already occurred and this sort of behavior was never fully discussed. Players are aware that their PC's goals will not always fully align, and that PVP may occur, but we haven't discussed the possibility of players being fully villainous.
* Players are aware that they may receive more or less narrative attention based on their choices and the direction of the story. | 2020/11/09 | [
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/177251",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com",
"https://rpg.stackexchange.com/users/56975/"
] | I've both DMed surprise villain PCs (two of them!) and played the surprise villain PC myself, over multiple D&D 4e campaigns. Based on those experiences, I recommend the following:
Ground Rules With Your Villainous Player
----------------------------------------
Before starting on this plot, lay down some ground rules with your villainous player based on your group's tolerance for various "degrees" of villainy. For example, if you think your players might like the narrative idea of a villain PC, but don't want PVP, then one ground rule is that your villainous player can be a villain but must never instigate PVP. Similarly, if there are taboo topics at your table, such as torture, your villainous player must agree to never broach those topics, even in villainy.
If you're concerned that your villainous player will (or does) suffer from My Guy Syndrome, however, I strongly recommend against letting them play a villain PC at all. It's very easy for even the most well-intentioned MGS player to succumb to their syndrome and cause problems. Consider this player's past table behavior and whether they've shown signs of MGS. If so, it's likely not worth the risk. On the other hand, if they have a history of working with the group in the interest of a fun and exciting story for everyone, they're an excellent candidate.
Foreshadow, Foreshadow, Foreshadow
----------------------------------
@mikeq's answer recommends telling your players up front about your surprise. This is a good general suggestion if you're about to do something narratively that you aren't sure the players will enjoy. Based on your additional contextual points, it sounds like this *might* be something your players would be interested in. So **there's a middle ground between telling your players everything (and ruining the surprise), and hiding everything (and risking an unpleasant surprise).**
[Foreshadowing](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing), if you aren't familiar with the term, is a "clue or allusion embedded in the narrative that predicts some later event or revelation." In other words, **it's a hint at the direction of the plot which you can use to gauge your players' reactions to the planned twist.** Now, especially in a tabletop RPG, you need to be ten times as blatant about your foreshadowing as a typical movie or novel - your players are holding a lot more in their heads and it's easy to miss a single subtle clue. **Work with your villain-PC to establish lots of potential foreshadowing options,** such as being away mysteriously right at the same time an NPC winds up dead, or mysterious letters arriving which the PC hides from the other party members, or notable but ambiguous evidence left behind at the crime scene (E.g., your villain-PC is a tabaxi? There's cat fur at the scene. Suspicious, but not definite proof).
Mind Your Players' Reactions
----------------------------
This is a shared responsibility between you and your villainous player. **Both of you must watch your players' reactions closely to all the foreshadowing you drop.** I say this is partially your villainous player's responsibility because when I played the villain-PC, I spent quite a bit of time monitoring my fellow players' reactions to the hints I was dropping. If I dropped what I thought was a vital hint and got absolutely zero response, I would often drop another hint, just to make sure it was picked up on by *someone*. On the flip side, it's also your villainous player's responsibility to make sure they aren't hogging the limelight. You as the GM have some responsibility here as well, but given how many other responsibilities the GM has, you need your villainous player's full support.
**You're looking for hints about how well the other PCs will take this news.** If your players eagerly latch on to your foreshadowing hints, and speculate enthusiastically about the mystery villain's identity (bonus points if they actually suspect each other and seem to like the idea), great! Carry on. If, instead, your players express doubt or concern about the possibility that this villain might be one of their own, then abort mission and start over. Which leads into my next point:
Be Willing to Bail
------------------
The nice thing about TTRPGs is that you as the GM can change the direction of your plot as much as you feel is necessary for the whole table's enjoyment. **If you foreshadow this twist and get a strongly negative, or even just lukewarm, reaction: *reconsider***. Discuss it out of game with your villainous player, to make sure you're both on the same page and seeing the same reactions consistently (i.e., that it's not simply that the other players aren't picking up your foreshadowing). But make it clear to your villainous player before you start that if the other players don't seem to like the idea, you're going to retcon it away. Similarly, be ready to pull the plug if the villainous player starts coming down with My Guy Syndrome, or breaks any of the ground rules laid out before starting.
I've fortunately never had to retcon a villainous PC, but I've had to retcon a few other things which ended up not working out the way I wanted, and it's always better to do so than to push forward with an idea most or all of the group doesn't enjoy. | I would say, if you can GM it and he can play it really well, in the sense that it would be consistent and make sense for what's already known about the character and situation, that the character has their own agenda and is up to things that make sense, and has a reason for being in their position/relationships with the other PCs, etc, that it could be great... BUT that does not seem to be the case, or you would not be asking this question in this way.
If you can at least think of the reasons why this would not make sense and be consistent, then you might explain those to the player.
Like Dan B, I think the glaring larger problem is that there seem to be no developing situations or adversaries. You call that "plot", but from my perspective as a GM who runs dynamic campaigns, I suspect that framing those things as "plot" and "central adversaries" and not seeing/recognizing those things in the premade adventure, you and the players are not ending up with a sense of developing situations and adversaries... because you are all used to them being artificially planned and handed out, instead of found naturally during play.
Some tips:
* Pretty much all worlds and situations can have lots of "villains" and situations if they have people in them. Whoever the authorities, outlaws, and people who crave wealth and power, or who are just nasty people, are in the world, can potentially be villains, adversaries, opponents, etc., to the players, even ones they randomly encounter or notice (or who notice them) while they're walking through a town.
* In any situation, think about the NPCs, whether already opponents or just bystanders, who might take advantage of that situation in ways that may get the players' attention. Thieves, people who inform on what they observe of the PCs, and combat opponents who don't just fight to the death but flee and get away (possibly snagging something from the PCs if they can first) or live to fight another day, can/will all get player attention and curiosity and become "recurring villains" of a sort.
* Mention incidental details a lot, to conjure for the players that the world is an interesting place with consistent/real details, and allow the players to choose freely to investigate or ignore any of them.
* Don't over-explain or make too obvious what NPCs/situations/things in the game world you have detailed in advance or consider to be significant, or why things are the way they are. Just tell them what their PCs observe, including unimportant things, so that it's up to them to choose what to investigate or interact with. Act as if it could all be fun and interesting to mess around with.
If you make it obvious what's planned and significant and what's not, it can make the world seem bland and uninteresting.
* Notice and respond to what the players choose to investigate and interact with, and indulge those interests. Develop them and things like and related to them between sessions. In that way, the players can naturally discover and let you know what they're interested in, and find interesting things, and before you know it, related situations and interesting antagonists tend to emerge.
For example, I was running a simple wilderness monster hunting scenario, when the players randomly encountered a group of savages in ambush. The party had a standard practice of scouting carefully as they traveled, so I set up the situation on a sketch map and rolls determined they spotted the ambush at a distance. I made reaction rolls and the players decided to go talk to the savages. They didn't share a language but were friendly enough, and I did not meta-signal to the players that this was a random encounter. They decided to try to get information from and about the savages (of which I had nothing prepared, so I improvised). During the conversation, the players decided to try to trade with the natives, and found the natives had some scavenged minor valuables that they didn't value much. So when the party returned to civilization to resupply and heal, they also stocked up on things the natives were interested in, to trade with them. Then they went back and found the savages, by which time I had developed the savages and figured out how they related to the hunted monsters and other tribes, etc, and the situation developed more and more from there, following the players' choices and interests.
Another possible idea that I've seen work well with players who embraced it: You might have the player, or some other person not with the group, become an "adversary" player, not playing a PC in the group, but choosing what some other agents in the campaign are up to. |
367,301 | I had already Ubuntu OS installed on my desktop PC, where the software RAID 5 is configured ( 3 partitions /, swap and home ). This system was upgraded from the 11.04 till 13.04, it was quite messy, so I decided to install fresh system on existing partitions.
1st of all i found that there is no alternate version of the installer ( which i used to create previous installation ), so i stared with the regular image. I installed mdadm tools, assemble the partitions - fdisk are showing them properly - so i'm starting the installation - and everything i going fine until the GRUB instalation - this part fails - regardless of which partition i use as a target.
From the other hand, neither OpenSUse and Ubuntu 12.04 alternate does not have any problems with installing the GRUB - on this configuration, unfortunatelly Ubuntu 12.04 -> 12.10 upgrade is failing bacause of some Xorg issues ;(.
Maybe someone has an experience with installation of ubuntu 13.10 GRUB on the RAID 5 partitions - and could give me a hint, how to solve my problem.
Thanks in advance,
Piotr | 2013/10/28 | [
"https://askubuntu.com/questions/367301",
"https://askubuntu.com",
"https://askubuntu.com/users/208709/"
] | You can modify the mount options using the "Disk" utility. Open the Dash, type Disk, then enter. You will presented with a screen like this:
Select your partition of your HDD, then select the small cogs icon. You will have a screen like this:
Just turn off the Automatic Mount Options, and select the "Mount Point" where you like the drive mounted, etc. | Whenever a partition has no label it will be mounted using its UUID. To give it more sensible names we may add a label to a partition:
* [How to rename partitions?](https://askubuntu.com/questions/276911/how-to-rename-partitions)
We can then also mount this drive from the [fstab by label](https://askubuntu.com/questions/49371/fstab-folder-bind-on-partition-mounted-with-defaults-parameter) rather than by UUID in case we want to auto-mount it on boot. |
166,648 | Assume the voltages sources(InducedV1/V2/V3) are created by an inductor/or a strong magnetic field changing rapidly(or in anyway) the PS would power the load, however, there are induced-EMF's V1 in support while as V2/V3 in opposition. Since they are parallel and connected in series, I believe they all cancel out, the remaining voltage is 20V and the load current drawn is 0.2A from the power supply.
I was wondering, is the diode(D1) blocking any current? In the parallel sub-circuit of InducedV1 and the diode and the wire?
[simulate this circuit](/plugins/schematics?image=http%3a%2f%2fi.stack.imgur.com%2filEVO.png) – Schematic created using [CircuitLab](https://www.circuitlab.com/) | 2015/04/25 | [
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/166648",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com",
"https://electronics.stackexchange.com/users/37879/"
] | At the cathode of D1 relative to ground (the bottom line on your diagram) there is +30V. V2 and V3 are equal and in parallel and subtract 10V from the 30V leaving 20 volts relative to ground i.e. the load sees 20 volts and diode D1 does not conduct.
If the induced voltage was produced by an alternating field it will change direction after some time and the diode will become forward biased and may indeed destroy itself with that current. | >
>
> >
> > many points are unclear in this circuit. like impedance or V1, V2 and V3.
> >
> >
> > regarding your question, if D1 is blocking current or not...
> >
> >
> > notice one thing that, V1's polarity is supporting the main voltage source. if we consider the voltage sources to be ideal then, for load current, the path with V1 is best as it offers no resistance and diode will never conduct.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
(or else provide some more information or description for this circuit) |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.