np complete

anonymous asked:

I really want to start playing D&D, specifically DMing, but I'm not sure exactly how much I need to prepare vs how much is on the fly. Obviously I need maps and NPCs and a story, but do I need all the XP and treasure sorted out? Do I need to totally complete NPS character sheets? If I've got a bunch of first time players should I also be keeping track of their sheets?

To be completely honest, you don’t need much…

You don’t even need maps sometimes…

But what I’ll say is this:

Make a Storyboard of what you want to happen and when, if the Party doesn’t stop it in time, what happens? Are there any consequences?

Have Notes for NPCs, because unless they’re going to go into a combat scenario with the Party or against the Villains, then they don’t need a full character sheet. 

Have Notes on they’re appearance, like Hair, Skin and Eye color, and Notes about their Race and Class and what armor and weapons they wield.

There is a specific table in 5e for Leveling Up. 

So you may choose to create your Encounters so that the Party gets just enough XP to Level up…

As for Treasure, that is kind of up to You and the Party. 

If the Encounter was particularly hard, then maybe reward them with a Magic Item or some cool new Armor or Weapon. If the Encounter was quick and super easy, them maybe the Party only finds a few coins… 

Keeping Track of the Character Sheets is for the Players, let them do that…

If they are first time players, do a slow first session. It may sound boring, but it eases the Players into Roleplaying and getting use to rolling dice…

Maybe make it less combat and story for the first session, and more exploration, and towards the end of the session, give hints to the players about things going on around them, so you can keep them on track if they end up wandering off too much…



It is just SO cliche and it makes everything super awkward…

At the start of your new sessions, ask the players how their Characters know each other…

This gives you the idea of who has a relationship or friendship with someone else, and tells you how strongly that Character trusts them…

It REALLY helps a DM, especially if it’s their first time…

You have n problems.
You use an untyped language.
Now you have 0 problems.
Until you step outside, trip over, and explode.

You have n problems.
You store them in a machine integer.
You keep getting into trouble until you have 2^32 problems.
Thanks to modular arithmetic, you have 0 problems.

You have n problems.
You notice n is very large.
You add one more problem.
You still have n problems.
n is a floating point variable.

You have n problems.
Your problems are all orthogonal to each other.
Your problems form an n-dimensional vector space of infinite trouble.
Try to have collinear problems next time.

You have n problems.
n is a function of time that increases monotonically.
You hope that n is logarithmic but fear it is exponential.

You have n problems.
You fix one.
You have n problems.
You fix one.
You have n problems.
You start to suspect the decrement opcode is not working to spec.

You have n problems.
The first n - 1 problems require boolean answers.
The last problem is a constraint across all the others.
Your problems are NP-complete.

First post discussing intelligence and type. If we assume that intelligence is defined as “the ability to solve problems for which the solutions are elegant and easy to understand despite the process of finding the solution being complex and difficult” then we can prove mathematically that all forms of intelligence above a certain threshold are fundamentally the same. (NP-completeness)
This chart shows NP-complete problems of increasing complexity on the X and time (logarithmic-ish) on the Y. The diagonal is the corrected average for all people (NP-complete problems can generally be solved in some O(a^n) where a is constant). The classes A, B, C, and D are added for convenience. Strictly speaking, A represents problems for which the average person may find a solution within a few hours, B represents problems for which the average person may find a solution within a few days, but not in a few hours, etc. Generally, though, A represents daily problem solving (e.g. how to get to the dry cleaners and attend a meeting while managing the screaming child in the backseat) B represents basic assignments and tasks (the year-end reports due Monday) C represents trade skills and specialized tasks (designing the new Tesla model 3) and D represents deep, philosophical and scientific queries (how can I maximize happiness in the workplace)

The chart above shows that ENTPs are not very good at the executive functions described by classes A and B, but are quite quick with trade skills and especially bright with deep, complex problems on the shallow end of D, but become increasingly average as D goes D-per. INTJs, on the other hand, excel at executive functions but become bogged down in trade skills and specialized tasks (They easily over-complicate simple projects in order to make something of unreasonable quality and cool-factor). INTJs continue to have deficits in shallow D problems, but as D becomes D-per, INTJs begin to excel beyond any other type. ENTPs and INTJs will be equally competent at trade skills just beyond B and towards mid-D, and will often engage in the most pleasant discussions in these settings. Team success depends on assigning ENTPs tasks between the two intersections and INTJs tasks on either side of the middle interval. Failure to do this will breed inefficiency and workplace disharmony.

Note that for classes A and B, these types, on average, are slightly below average, yet for classes C and D, these types, on average, are considerably above average.

INTPs, by the way, will have an extreme version of the ENTP curve. They will have worse executive function, better trade skills, and initially better D skills except will skyrocket towards average sooner and faster than ENTPs. The new intersections for INTJ-INTP will be just below the C and in the shallow end of D just below the diagonal. This analysis is important because it finally sheds light on the eternal question of “who’s smarter” between the two INTx. For the range (A,C), INTJs are smarter. For the range (B,C), INTPs are smarter. For shallow ranges of (X,D), INTPs will be smarter. For deep ranges of (X,D), INTJs will be smarter. 

How to prove it
  • Proof by example:
    The author gives only the case n=2 and suggests that it contains most of the ideas of the general proof.
  • Proof by intimidation:
  • Proof by vigorous handwaving:
    Works well in a classroom or seminar setting.
  • Proof by cumbersome notation:
    Best done with access to at least four alphabets and special symbols.
  • Proof by exhaustion:
    An issue or two of a journal devoted to your proof is useful.
  • Proof by omission:
    “The reader may easily supply the details.”
    “The other 253 cases are analogous.”
  • Proof by obfuscation:
    A long plotless sequence of true and / or meaningless syntactically related statements.
  • Proof by wishful citation:
    The author cites the negation, converse, or generalization of a theorem from the literature to support his claims.
  • Proof by funding:
    How could three different government agencies be wrong?
  • Proof by eminent authority:
    “I saw Karp in the elevator and he said it was probably NP-complete.”
  • Proof by personal communication:
    “Eight-dimensional colored cycle stripping is NP-complete
    [Karp, personal communication].”
  • Proof by reduction to the wrong problem:
    “To see that infinite-dimensional colored cycle stripping is decidable, we reduce it to the halting problem.”
  • Proof by reference to inaccessible literature:
    The author cites a simple corollary of a theorem to be found in a privately circulated memoir of the Slovenian Philological Society, 1883.
  • Proof by importance:
    A large body of useful consequences all follow from the proposition in question.
  • Proof by accumulated evidence:
    Long and diligent search has not revealed a counterexample.
  • Proof by cosmology:
    The negation of the proposition is unimaginable or meaningless. Popular for proofs of the existence of God.
  • Proof by mutual reference:
    In reference A, Theorem 5 is said to follow from Theorem 3 in reference B, which is shown to follow from Corollary 6.2 in reference C, which is an easy consequence of Theorem 5 in reference A.
  • Proof by metaproof:
    A method is given to construct the desired proof. The correctness of the method is proved by any of these techniques.
  • Proof by picture:
    A more convincing form of proof by example. Combines well with proof by omission.
  • Proof by vehement assertion:
    It is useful to have some kind of authority relation to the audience.
  • Proof by ghost reference:
    Nothing even remotely resembling the cited theorem appears in the reference given.
  • Proof by forward reference:
    Reference is usually to a forthcoming paper of the author, which is often not as forthcoming as at first.
  • Proof by semantic shift:
    Some of the standard but inconvenient definitions are changed for the statement of the result.
  • Proof by appeal to intuition:
    Cloud-shaped drawings frequently help here.

(Source: Dana Angluin, Sigact News 1983)

Patients who are in a hospital are called hospital inpatients.

At first glance this makes sense. But at second glance, this is one of the only words in the English language with the letter combination “np”. There’s usually a rule that if n + p come together for some reason, the “n” is changed to an “m”. Thus, the “in-” you use as a negating prefix in words like “inconclusive” and “informal” becomes “im-” when added to words beginning with p: thus “impractical” and “impossible.”

And the thing is, this happened with in + patient before. When we want to say someone is not a patient person, we say they’re impatient!

But when we add in + patient in the hospital context, it’s “inpatient”!

English is a very silly language.

Wednesday Dec 7, 2011

11am circuits, spent a lot of time watching one guy do some annoying algebra on the board, more freq response stuff

1pm, dsa2, last lecture. Finished up theoretical computer science topic with various NP-Complete problems and examples of how other NP-complete problems can be reduced to them (or was it the other way around?). Specifically relating 3SAT and something about independent sets in graphs (whatever that problem was called).

DSA2 ended early (2:20ish rather than 3pm), went to the 4th floor to eat food

went to computer center to work on DSP matlab stuff with M, spent a long time figuring out exactly what to do for part f of one of the problems. It’s annoying because it’s an array of polynomials, but the polynomials are represented with vectors so they have to be stored in a cell, and then matrix multiplication of those polynomials is annoying because you can’t use the built-in matrix multiplication, since element-wise multiplication involves convolving the polynomials (that are represented as vectors) in each of the elements of the cells

4pm, comm.theory. Went over more error control coding schemes; some interesting stuff that involved shift registers and adders and mod2 arithmetic, which actually made sense to me because that stuff makes more sense than what I consider to be “actual” math. Convolutional codes, trellis, state diagrams, maximum likelihood decoding (Viterbi algorithm). I think it is pretty cool, it kinda reminds me of graph algorithms and finding the path with the minimum cost (where the cost is represented by number of bit errors).

6pm went home, it was raining again. Napped from 6:30pm to about 8:15pm, then procrastinated and then at about 11pm decided to write up some stuff for the Japanese presentation tomorrow.

So today I reached 1,000 followers and it’s something I didn’t think would happen and it totally blows my mind! So I threw together a quick giveaway!!! Check it out:


  • This is only for my followers
  • One like, one reblog. That’s it.
  • Please tag it as giveaway, as to not annoy followers.
  • Winners will have 24 hours to claim a prize and will be redrawn at that point, if the prize has been claimed.
  • Giveaway will end. I don’t know, I’m bad at setting end dates. Wednesday the 21st.
  • There will be three winners. First gets first pick, second gets second, third gets whatever is left over. You know how that goes.


Two items from this list. It would be more, but I don’t have any other giftboxes ^^;

1mil NP

Complete set of codestones.

So there ya go! Enjoy!

And thank you so much for following me. Especially because I know I’m not always a neoblog. I know I post a lot about my personal life and other things I like and I know how that can be irritating sometimes.

So thank you all so much for being an amazing source of support. I seriously can’t explain how much I love you guys and how much you all mean to me.

Especially those of you who have been there since the beginning.