Hey there programmers, I know this is a more markup/typesetting deal, but I thought there might be people who are interested. After being dissapointed with many of the options out there for making ttrpg item cards, I made a LaTeX template for that exact purpose. I wanted it to be relatively easy to use, generate clean images, and be (semi) form fillable. The cards scale in height with the quantity of text given and image size, so users don't need to finagle with the box dimensions too much, and all card sections (generated by custom commands) can either be commented out or toggled off if they aren't relevant to the item.
If there are any people familiar with TeX who have thoughts or constructive criticism, I would love to get some more eyes on this. I have already posted this in the relavant ttrpg areas, but I am hoping people here might have more technical critiques. I have already gotten feedback that a setting for fixed dimensions would be smart in case players want to get card sleeves or a card binder, and want to make a back side for longer item descriptions, which I will work into V2.
Here is an example of a completed card with all the trimmings: Staff of the Jackal Lord
Thanks to anyone who takes the time to check it out, and if anyone uses it, please let me know what you think!
Rant about people like this incoming:
I am a few months away from defending my PhD in Particle and Nuclear Physics and this is such an omnipresent issue with many of the people I interact with regularly. Poorly paraphrasing Dan Olson of Folding Ideas: Because they understand one really complicated subject (particle physics), they see all other subjects as lesser, easily understood and interpreted through the lens of their area of expertise.
I know at least one professor, well respected in his field, who is a vaccine conspiracist and happy to tacitly endorse right wing conspiratorial thought, despite being an expert on mathematical modelling of complex systems. He should understand the rigor involved in modelling and solving a problem like covid, but instead assumes that because it is complicated, the immunologists and virologists must just not be able to arrive at a conclusion he deems good enough to challenge his simplistic view of the situation.
Many professors, however well intentioned, try and reduce labor issues to math problems instead of considering the human element that is really the core of the problem. They build their perspective around explotative capitalist rhetoric, even when graduate students are struggling to afford food and rent. Then they turn around and wonder why enrollment is declining and pursuing academia is falling in popularity
People like Sabine and these professors I have dealt with loudly perpetuate whatever worldview they already hold, assuming that because they must be intelligent enough to grasp difficult math and physics concepts, they couldn't be ignorant enough for their unrelated ideas to be wrong. It is infuriating because it adds a unearned veneer of authenticity to the concepts, despite a transparent lack of knowledge. Then there is feedback, where people use this support as their evidence for embracing these ideologies and as a building block for furthering their agenda.
These people are also, generally, stale in terms of their own academic output, for I think the same reason as their uneducated takes on other topics. They assume that they understand what they need to and stop grasping for better understanding. My PI is constantly seeking out new experiments to get involved with to try and widen his understanding, and is also a great proponent of progresssive issues. I don't think this is coincidence. My scientific role model, another advisor of mine, is trying to develop a better academic system that would make education on the most pressing issue today (global warming) better included and more competently taught in university curriculum, regardless of degree topic. He seeks out as many opinions from students and experts as possible in furtherance of this goal. This is despite being one of the key innovators in our field, where his word might be taken as gospel, but because he hasn't lost his fundamental curiosity about the world, he still seeks out more informed opinions in this endeavor.
The really great scientists keep this curiosity and question their own expertise constantly. The Sabines of the world become comfortable in their own knowledge, and by extension, their own ignorance.