u/allquixotic

Encouraged by an extremely kind email reply from Rachelle Willemsma, creator of the most recent iteration of the Pathfinder class infographic at https://willemsma.design/pathfinder/ , I created a website that will generate an infographic for new players, to give them an overview of all the classes for Pathfinder or Starfinder second edition. It has all currently released and playtest classes. You can add the pre-gens/iconics as graphics if you want, add your own custom ones, or leave them out. Lots of settings.

https://pf-sf-infographics.top/

Ok, but why?

The use case I envision is to get it printed and laminated at a print shop on like 24"x36" paper, and put it on a wall in a game shop. Or you can just print the "booklet" version on regular paper and bring it with your pregen stack.

Known issue: I'm not very familiar with a lot of the new classes, and especially the playtest classes. My characterization and summary of each class, and the ratings in terms of offense/defense/support/utility/difficulty may be way off. I'm actively looking for constructive input to make it better.

It may be easier for new players to glance at this graphic and pick a character that either looks appealing or has a strength they think they'd enjoy. If they like to deal damage, pick one with high offense. If they like to help the party, pick one with support. If they like to always have a useful skill out of combat, pick one with utility.

It can also help intermediate players select a character class when putting a table together. Have two barbarians, a fighter and a rogue, and not sure what to pick? You probably want someone with strong support/utility in the high magic ability category. Of course, veteran players know everything by heart, so.

Behind-the-scenes Info

The "GitHub Repository" link at the top will take you to the code. It is free and open source. This infographic is customizable and editable just by changing a few settings in the web application, or editing small configuration files.

Before publishing, I obtained email permission from the originator of the infographic idea to leverage her idea. If she had said no, I would have kept it private and never shared it with anyone except the tables I play at in person. But she was extremely gracious and supportive, and this would not have been possible without her hard work as inspiration.

I have no motivation to make a single cent off of this work, even if it were possible (and since this is leveraging Paizo Community Use content, I probably couldn't make any money off of it, legally, even if I wanted to). I am simply offering this for the benefit of the community. Use it or don't, it's all the same to me. :)

Encouraged by an extremely kind email reply from Rachelle Willemsma, creator of the most recent iteration of the Pathfinder class infographic at https://willemsma.design/pathfinder/ , I created a website that will generate an infographic for new players, to give them an overview of all the classes for Pathfinder or Starfinder second edition. It has all currently released and playtest classes. You can add the pre-gens/iconics as graphics if you want, add your own custom ones, or leave them out. Lots of settings.

https://pf-sf-infographics.top/

Ok, but why?

The use case I envision is to get it printed and laminated at a print shop on like 24"x36" paper, and put it on a wall in a game shop. Or you can just print the "booklet" version on regular paper and bring it with your pregen stack.

Known issue: I'm not very familiar with a lot of the new classes, and especially the playtest classes. My characterization and summary of each class, and the ratings in terms of offense/defense/support/utility/difficulty may be way off. I'm actively looking for constructive input to make it better.

It may be easier for new players to glance at this graphic and pick a character that either looks appealing or has a strength they think they'd enjoy. If they like to deal damage, pick one with high offense. If they like to help the party, pick one with support. If they like to always have a useful skill out of combat, pick one with utility.

It can also help intermediate players select a character class when putting a table together. Have two barbarians, a fighter and a rogue, and not sure what to pick? You probably want someone with strong support/utility in the high magic ability category. Of course, veteran players know everything by heart, so.

Behind-the-scenes Info

The "GitHub Repository" link at the top will take you to the code. It is free and open source. This infographic is customizable and editable just by changing a few settings in the web application, or editing small configuration files.

Before publishing, I obtained email permission from the originator of the infographic idea to leverage her idea. If she had said no, I would have kept it private and never shared it with anyone except the tables I play at in person. But she was extremely gracious and supportive, and this would not have been possible without her hard work as inspiration.

I have no motivation to make a single cent off of this work, even if it were possible (and since this is leveraging Paizo Community Use content, I probably couldn't make any money off of it, legally, even if I wanted to). I am simply offering this for the benefit of the community. Use it or don't, it's all the same to me. :)

Has anyone encountered an issue where the GPD MicroPC 2 fan doesn't work out of the box? And within minutes the unit gets REALLY hot and starts to quietly beep. I re-seated the fan cable and it didn't help. With the back cover off I can see the fan is just not spinning. I'm not eager to ship it back and wait another month for the bidirectional shipping (sending this one back to Amazon and waiting a week for a new one to arrive). Any ideas for what to do?

2018 Honda Clarity PHEV.

12V battery is a brand new Duracell Platinum AGM about 2 weeks old.

Before and after recent 12V battery replacement, the battery dies completely every few days/weeks, to the point that the car can't be opened with electronic lock, nor started.

We keep the high voltage (hybrid battery) at 80-90% charge at all times except when it's on the road. It gets normal expected range. We run the gas engine a few times a month too.

Car is driven 1-7 times per week (it's variable) - almost always very short trips on the order of 5 to 20 minutes. 30+ minute drives are very rare. We leave the light stalk on Auto and the overhead map lights on Door. The car goes completely dark after ~1 minute after exiting and locking the doors.

Have charged the new 12V to full using a Noco Genius 10 several times. Consistently it loses charge down to about 25% within a week, and if I don't put it back on the charger, it needs to be jumped in less than a month.

Honda dealership said phantom drain 20 mV; anything 70 mV or less is normal. Battery tested perfectly good. DC to DC converter (this car's substitute for a conventional vehicle's alternator) tested good.

Conclusion of service advisor, and us, is that we're on the border of just not driving the car often enough and far enough to keep the 12V battery at a consistent charge. This problem also occurred on the previous 12V, which is why we replaced it as a first troubleshooting step. The new battery was manufactured in March of this year.

Are we a good candidate to get a solar panel permanently installed on the roof and connect it to the 12V? I know a little tiny bit about solar charging (I have whole house solar) and I know we need a charge controller, ideally MPPT.

Called around to a bunch of local shops and they're like, "uhhhh... we don't do that". RV shops say they don't do it for cars.

I could DIY, but my biggest concern is that my install would either put wires in the path of the wipers, or would be a problem for the waterproofing of the vehicle. I'm also not sure where to put the solar charge controller.

Has anyone done this? Can you recommend a product and/or a shop?

The car is always parked outside, in partial shade, but with more than enough hours of sunlight in the day to hopefully keep the battery from discharging during periods of low use.

With the sky high prices of models like gpt-5.5 and especially Fable 5, it's becoming less possible for hobbyists and small and even medium businesses to afford paying API rates for tokens. Only large businesses with 6 and 7 figure AI budgets can afford to use Fable 5 for serious work. Everyone else is completely dependent on subsidized plans from OpenAI and Anthropic.

Anthropic doesn't let you "bring your plan" to third-party tools, and OpenAI might lock down theirs someday, too. The trade for getting tokens at a massive discount (compared to API pricing) is that you have to use their software. I can feel that OpenAI will follow Anthropic soon on this.

This is really unfortunate, because SOTA models are uniquely good at efficiently and quickly solving problems. The rate at which they fully implement a correct solution end-to-end rather than "cartel coding" (= doing something that looks like it might work but doesn't actually DO anything when tested, or is counterproductive) is leagues above the affordable models like Gemini Flash 3.5, MiniMax, Qwen, Nemotron, Composer, etc.

Basically if a single prompt to solve a medium-high complexity issue in my code costs $50 on the API or 5% of my weekly cap on Claude Max x20, I'm going to go with the Claude Max x20 every single time, not Kilo.

I hope Kilo is finding traction in enterprise customers, and will survive, because someday Mythos class model quality price will (hopefully) come down. But it is laughable how bad so many of these cheap models are. Going with a subsidized subscription is really the only option for people who aren't getting consistent results with other models.

Ultimately I support Kilo as a company, their tools and their transparency, and their ethics. But, while I can afford $400/month in subscriptions to OpenAI + Anthropic, the amount of use I need to get out of them would not be affordable through Kilo, even with a 50% discounted yearly subscription.

Also, when a model tries to fix something and does it incorrectly, that's worth, on average, $0. Depending on the context, it might be worth less than $0 if it actively breaks things, or slightly more than $0 if it implements a partial solution but stops short of actually finishing it. So even if Qwen, etc. are ""cheaper"", if I have to spend more and more labor and time and repeated prompts to get it to finish the solution correctly, that's worse than paying out the nose for tokens like with Fable.

What I'm saying is, if you can figure out some way to deliver SOTA performance with prices resembling the subsidized models, I'll pay Kilo thousands per year for it. But if I did my work (game development) at retail API rates, it'd be tens of thousands -- out of my price range.

In Codex GUI (e.g. on Mac; I'm not sure about other platforms as I don't use them), in the Claude Code GUI, and even in the open source Codex CLI (see https://github.com/openai/codex/tree/main/codex-rs/ext/goal/src ) -- there is a feature called /goal .

It appeared like a month ago, I want to say. Both OpenAI and Anthropic added it around the same time-ish, and Claude has even done some marketing around it lately on YouTube.

For those who have followed agentic coding since its inception, this is basically a sophisticated Ralph loop, with custom GUI and official support/maintenance/improvement from the SOTA model companies.

So my question is, if I adopt Cursor and Composer 2.5, do I have an option similar to /goal in Cursor?

How this differs from other techniques: Simple, really - almost every model, no matter how much you beg and plead with it, will stop its conversation and hand control back to you after doing what it deems to be a "unit of work". So if you have a plan with 10 steps, for example, it might do steps 1 and 2, then be like "I've done steps 1 and 2, tests passed. Next steps suggested: steps 3 and 4".

The models are trained to do something useful and then stop. So you need some kind of harness around it to keep telling it to do the next step. In fact, before /goal (and when I was too lazy to use a custom loop program), I would develop a plan and literally just type "Continue" and send that prompt over and over each time it completed the previous step and handed control back to me.

/goal is better than just repeatedly typing "Continue" because it puts an LLM turn in the loop of determining whether your goal has been met or not. If your goal is to complete your plan end-to-end, and the conversation finishes after steps 1 and 2, it'll tell it to continue to steps 3 and 4 automatically. And you can sleep, or do other things, or game, or write prompts for other LLMs, while it finishes.

It seems obvious, but it's really not. I tried writing a program a while ago to loop Claude Code CLI, and many times it either over-shot or under-shot my goal. Over-shooting wastes tokens, and under-shooting wastes your attention.

So it's great to have the major model providers' official programs provide this feature. But if Cursor wants to compete, I think they need to add the same.

What do you think? Should this be a built-in part of Cursor, or is it something the community can bolt on with skills or MCP or something?

I have a game codebase written in Golang, about 350k SLOC, a little over half of that is compiled to WebAssembly and run as a modern web app (WebGPU or WebGL, WebTransport, WebAudio, etc.)

I branched out to try Augment, Cursor (on Auto), and Codex with gpt-5.5 over several weeks. I gave each tool a good, honest shake. None of them came close to Opus 4.7 in Claude Code.

What I notice about Opus is that it:

• Works harder to understand my code and identify all the relevant places where it might need to do updates.
• Seems to understand the little nuances in my prompts better.
• As a result of the above, it has a significantly higher accuracy in properly implementing what I requested on the first try (or second try).

By contrast, other models seem focused on telling me they're done as quickly as possible, but they end up "cartel coding" - adding a few lines here and there and calling it done.

In a client/server program where state has to be marshaled across the wire and kept in sync between client and server, many feature changes require changes at numerous layers of the stack. Opus 4.7 seems to understand that implicitly more than any other model - and it usually "does the right thing."

The runner up is gpt-5.5 in Codex, which is good if I'm very explicit about what I want, but I have to like, tell it what to do on the client, tell it what to do on the server, and be almost annoyingly detailed, to the point where I could have written it myself.

Not Opus. Most of the time, I just tell it what I want from a user-facing perspective, and it automatically changes the client, server, network proto, renderer, etc. all in one go.

I tried to quit Claude Code and failed because it's simply the best at understanding and working on large codebases. This is my experience.

/me cancels my cancellation of Claude Max 20x