u/jaminfine

Hopefully this is okay since it isn't directly food, instead it is cooking hardware. Also please note: I think we can all agree that a traditional electric stove is the worst of the three. It has the downsides of both the other options. I am only trying to compare gas stoves to flat top electric stoves here.

I have a gas stove and all my friends seem to think it is the ultimate cooking experience. The main feature I hear again and again is that it instantly turns on and off. This is technically true, however it is misleading because it's still going to take time to warm up the pan when you turn it on, and the grates will still be hot for awhile after turning it off. Sure, even with that, I will concede that with gas, pans warm up faster (from off) and grates cool off faster compared to electric stoves. But it certainly isn't instant for the purposes of starting cooking and being safe to touch after.

However as a tradeoff for that minor upside, you have major downsides to gas.

First, cleaning sucks. Flat top electric you can just wipe down quickly with a sponge or wet paper towel once it's cool enough. No disassembly at all. With gas, you have to remove giant grates, and also the burners themselves. And you have to clean all the pieces which are all unevenly shaped. There are awkward corners to everything, especially where the stovetop meets the burners, that make a full clean difficult compared to a flat top electric stove.

Second, the maximum heat is much higher on flat top electric. Sure, it takes a while to get there, but putting that on high is way hotter than the max that has flames can get to. When I make a big stir fry, I feel like it takes much longer overall because I'm waiting for the liquids to cook off at max flame heat. Versus using electric it's way faster and sizzles way louder.

Third, kind of minor but you can't easily use a gas stove as extra counter space while not cooking since the grates are, well, grates. Flat top electric doubles as extra counter space when not in use since it's nice and flat.

Finally, gas is more expensive than electric. Kind of a no brainer. I'm paying more for gas. And it's overall a worse experience.

Hey hivemind, I've done several runs so far, most of them died well before floor 20, but some reached the boss there, and promptly died to getting sniped with lots of fireballs.

Then, a couple friends and I decided to try a new strategy. What if we grinded levels as much as possible and explored every corner of every floor? Well now the game is taking forever and we had to save and quit around floor 14 cuz we had already spent like 3 hours on our run. So at this rate it will take several sessions to complete this one run, but we are vastly more powerful than we ever have been before!

So I'm wondering, is that the intended strategy? To scour each level for resources and have runs take many days to finish?

I hope you don't hate me for saying we disabled the minotaur because I don't like feeling rushed. But I also think taking forever is becoming a problem.

Any advice?

My group has a mix of serious gamers and more casual gamers. I want to have a good mix of deeper games and more streamlined games to appeal to both mindsets.

6 of us got together to play Betrayal 3rd Edition, which is supposed to be a big improvement compared to 2nd edition. However, I'd say our playthrough had a few major issues and I'm wondering if these are common issues or if we just got unlucky.

First, one player fell through the laundry shoot into the basement, and then was stuck in the basement alone for the entire rest of the game. Her turns essentially meant nothing to the haunt. She couldn't help us and also couldn't be hurt by the traitor. So naturally, she felt excluded and that she didn't really have much agency in the game. She just explored rooms every turn.

Second, we found the rules confusing for the haunt. I don't want to spoil it, but the haunt was called "A Ghost of a Chance." And it left some things kind of unclear. For example, it detailed how we could stun the monsters with an attack roll. And separately, how we could entirely eliminate a monster after stunning it, without even rolling for it. Why would we ever not take that action? What was the point of using the stun mechanic if the monster is immediately removed right afterwards? I was really hoping the haunt rules would be explained in enough detail that we wouldn't spend so much time wondering if we had it right.

Finally, one player died around a half hour before the end. And dead players are just eliminated it seems. So she left the table and did something else while we finished the game. That feels bad to have player elimination in a modern game. Does that often happen? Is there something a dead player can still do?

Overall it kinda felt like the rules were convoluted, yet the strategy was still shallow. And it really just came down to rolling the dice a lot. It didn't feel like the heroes outplayed the traitor. Just that the traitor got some unlucky rolls. So my real question is did we have a dud of a first playthrough and usually it feels better? Or is it just like that?

The other day I saw a mom scold her son for saying 67 and doing the hand gesture associated with it. So although I'm well aware this is old by now, it still matters to some.

I don't understand why people react so negatively to the 67 meme. It seems to bring genuine joy to kids in a way that isn't harmful. It helps kids socialize with each other and with adults in a confident and friendly way. They are inviting laughter and positivity. Sure, it's complete nonsense! But that makes it FAR better than many alternatives.

When I was younger, kids threw around the middle finger, cursed a lot, and especially loved to call everything and everyone "retarded." This of course, is harmful and is no longer socially acceptable. It would have been much better for us to just laugh at nonsense instead of needing vulgarity and insults.

By contrast, as 67 is not an insult, the only way it can be used against someone is if they intentionally show themselves to be annoyed by it. If instead, you join in, you just get to have a positive experience with your kid. Literally your kid just wants attention and to laugh with you, and your reaction is to get mad about it??

And even those without kids consider 67 to be bad because it's stupid and pointless. But isn't every meme stupid and pointless? I don't see why people especially hate 67 compared to millennials like me screaming "Butt Scratcher" and "Leeroy Jenkins' in public spaces in the early 2000s. Is just seems like you guys are bullies and want to pick on young people for being into different memes than you. 67 is good wholesome fun and should be celebrated.