Turing Complete

It is a game about building functional computer by combining logic gates. Game arranged in series of small puzzles to make it digestible for people without electric engineering degree like me. You slowly build new components, so you can use them later as higher level abstraction until you get to the point of having to program your own computer to solve further puzzles. If you curious how computers work, this game is a gem.

I think it mostly explained by that in earlier days most people who dived into programming did it because it interested them. Then it became one of most lucrative career path, and naturally it saw surge of people, who do not share same interests. Relative amount of people invested in dive bombing into meaty details dropped, but it quite possible that absolute amount have not declined by much.

While I agree that most of perception that linux is harder than windows comes from the fact what most people already invested they time into learning windows and not linux, there are certain difficulties users have to face then transitioning.

Linux is not uniform platform, and thus solutions to problems might depend on user enviroment. Average user want to have UI solution. But then searching it up they likely to not specify graphical environment or even distro, and thus they will likely mostly see terminal based solutions, mixed with UI solutions some of which will not work out of the box, because they assume KDE environment, while user has gnome.

This is a necessary trade-of for being able to provide extremely customizable system, as opposed to providing lowest common denominator system, but having docs for common tasks that easy to follow.

Pathfinder 2e:

• Instead of move, standard and bonus action pathfinder 2e has just 3 actions. Attack takes an action, move takes an action, most spells takes two actions, and some abilities require all three.
• Degree of success determined by how much you meet/miss DC: if you succeed by 10 more it is critical success, if you fail by 10 or more it is critical failure. Natural one and natural 20 nudge degree of success by one in corresponding directions: crit fail <-> fail <-> success <-> crit success. Most checks have different results for each of those.
• Instead of advantage/disadvantage you gain flat bonuses/penalties of 3 categories. Combined with previous rule heavily stacked bonuses could bring 5% crit chance to something as absurd as 50%.
• Attack actions are very impactful, but then you repeat them each following attack takes a significant penalty. This breaks monotony of combat there everyone uses they strongest actions all day long, and having to opt to different choices. Often best choice for 3 action is too aid your ally in some way, and I really enjoy emphasis on teamwork.

Together those rules combine into two intertwined combat puzzles of

• applying bonuses to your team/denying them from enemies
• managing your actions/disrupting enemy action flow

System itself is more coherent, and codified it traits, removing a lot of GM fiat from adjudicating combat. This is not necessary good or bad, as some groups enjoy tactical combat, while others much prefer to just narrate and see what happens. (Although IMO dnd 5e is actually much closer to being codified then free-flow) Then making a video game tho you will need to codify game rules into consistent well communicated mechanics, and building on top of system which offers it from the start is definitely an advantage.

While GM decides what monsters to throw into players, they still need to know what they could use without it being either underwhelming or overwhelming. You dismiss this simply by saying: “just be a good DM”.

• New DM’s will want guidelines to start from.
• If combat is important having written rules help to use consistent ruling on same situation in different instances.
• Story focused DM might reduce amount of effort needed to plan combat, since there is no need to build it from scratch.

Disadvantage of having to look up rules then you don’t remember them could be mitigated by just saying: Look guys, I don’t remember ruling now, so not to break the flow, I will rule it this way, and look it up later.

So while for most players rule heavy systems are less accessible, they are actually more accessible for many DMs, and since mastering have much higher barrier of entry, such systems at least should not be dismissed outright.

Blogs are real cool, since they allow you instead of listening hundred hours worth of work read only most essential summary. But that makes them self contained thing, not a direct replacement. On the other hand, how many people really need and can follow gpu driver development in depth.

Sekiro is the closest reference I know, but it is still quite different. Sekiro most important part is bosses, and I doubt En Garde will provide same variety (And if it against all odds proves me wrong it probably gonna become my new fav game). On the other hand En Garde focuses more on combat with regular enemies, and IMO does it better then other games with similar gameplay.