Player2

As I understand it, that would require creating a new attachment point onto the character model for these items to be attached. Yes, these things already attach to those areas but under the Head/Detail 2 and Shoulders positions. Think of it as an action figure with a hole in the figure for each costume category that we have. You can only put one item in each hole. Creating a new attachment point isn't as simple as drilling a new hole into an action figure, though. It requires coding to recognize what goes in that new spot, and then retooling everything else that uses costume slots (players and NPCs) to recognize that new location. I'm not sure what the limits of this are, but I know that doing so posed challenges for the original dev team on live as a restriction for why we couldn't get winged characters with trench coats or any other loose flowing cape-like costume piece... because those pieces typically occupied the cape attachment point. But maybe I'm wrong and there's potential for workarounds like when they gave us asymmetrical boots, gloves, and shoulder items. Maybe the could split the Head Detail 1 and Detail 2 slots the same way, and designate specific items in each of the split categories... like all neck items in Detail 2b and everything else from Detail 2 into 2a.... while Detail 1 could be split into face and head, so anything that covers the face and eyes could go into 1a and everything that covers the ears or other areas of the head could be 1b. Or maybe just duplicate the entire lists so if you want both a mustache and a specific beard option to layer over each other, go for it. Safety goggles AND hockey mask? Why not? Anything that creates more options is a plus in my book. I just don't know how feasible it is to do so.

Heebie-Jeebies has the closed eyes face (one of the Supernatural choices), but it gave me open eyes twice and I'm out of credits for today. Still, the armor and crab backpack arms and insects all worked out pretty well, so I'm not going to stress over a little detail like the eyes right now.

I tried a few times to get her lack of regular eyes and/or the third eye on her forehead to appear. I used terms like "cyclops" and "single eye on the forehead," but the best I could get was her regular eyes being closed and not once out of 4 attempts did the forehead eye show up in any way. Surprisingly, it gave her rather clear facial details despite my using the Spectrum face to achieve the faceless appearance (to highlight the forehead eye). Still, the actual costume details came out nice.

I've always been both very proud and terribly ashamed of making Peggy Hooks. On one hand, it's awfully insensitive of quadruple amputees (and probably any amputees)... and on the other hand it's clever and funny wordplay, plus I really like how the Barbarian -> Metal shoulder piece rings cap the top of the Disco top's sleeves to compliment the metal of her hook prosthetics. I ran this image through 3 times, with the second and third using "hands, feet" in the negative prompt area because it kept giving her hands like she was holding a pair of sickles. Even on the third attempt, her right hook looks like it's being a metal hand that you can see the thumb and sort of see fingers if you squint a little... but at least they aren't fleshy-toned in this one. No feet actually showed up in any attempt, but I figured I'd put that in the negative prompt just in case.

Ancient Elements, a powerful golem combining the natural elements into a true force of nature...

Talk about toxic... it's Mold Maiden

The shell game... with cups.

It's illusion time... with my Illusion/Time controller, Miss Perception.

Behold the latest in unmanned infantry technology: The iTank

Looked at the auto-generated prompt and it may have had something to do with it including "casting a spell" in the description, as one typically associates chanting or speaking incantations as part of spellcasting and most people can't speak with their mouth closed.

I wasn't referring to you, but there are those people who will defend the idea of XP debt to the death because "muh badges".

XP debt is entirely counter-intuitive. It slows down your advancement when you fail, and yet all common wisdom suggests that we actually learn from our failures. How is it that learning from our failures slows us down while those who don't fail coast right on by to the goal more quickly? And all it was originally was a way to keep players paying into the subscription model by making them play longer. XP debt is stupid and I don't care about anyone's debt badges as a source of pride.

I'll never understand why people get so irritated about returning to old posts to the point of using terms like necro and resurrecting the dead. People stopped talking about something, nothing died unless the post gets locked. Sometimes everything that can be said about a topic at the time gets said and people move on, but what's wrong with coming back to that topic and exploring it once more to see if everything actually had been said?

Another suggestion: This event obviously lacked badges --especially for the crazy powerful giant monster. I think what would be funny is if the giant monster got the badges for each character it's killed on a given shard, or at least for the past 24 hours if too many would bog down the system. So when we right-click and select Info on the GM, we'll see a bunch of badges and all of them will have unique names of the people that it's stomped to death recently. Then when people complain "Where are the badges?" We can tell them there's LOTS of badges... just none for us.

Well... this came out better than I could have imagined.

I created Miss Truth on Jan 10, 2020 and posted screenshots of her in the best costumes thread six days later. She might have been lurking in the back of your memories.

I feel as though I have seen this movie at some point in my life.

Must be something wrong with me. I play with the classic set up and change nothing.

If we all do just a little, maybe we can clean up Perez Park once and for all.

"If'n you got a woodchucks problem I'll kill 'em, cook 'em, an' eat 'em."

Your assertion was that there was someone crazy out there trying some ideas that differed from the norm. My contention is that you should set your own trends, not wait and see what everyone else is doing or trying to follow the flavor of the month appears to be. But yes, we do have these forums where people can share their experiences and describe ideas that they've tried... but I'm trying to figure out if you mean that people are incapable of doing their own thing unless you have statistical information of what everyone has done as a group? Because I don't think you need to know what everyone has done to recognize ideas shared between people on the forum and in game to decide if an idea has merit or is crazy. For example, playing a Regen brute would be fairly crazy since Regen largely sucks and we can all discuss that without knowing how many (or few) people have played a brute with that power set. No one is playing in a vacuum, so if someone is trying something wild then someone else will see it and may bring it to the attention of others by talking about it in game or here on the forum. But how does statistical info help you decide how you want to play the game other than showing you the popular trend? I'm just saying screw trends, do your own thing regardless of what other people may or may not be doing. Maybe you will be the person trying something unusual that other people will want to talk about.

Fire and ice, so steamy...