What’s the difference between Small and Medium?

In Pathfinder 1st edition, a Small character received the following benefits and detriments compared to a Medium character:

  • +1 AC
  • +1 on attack rolls
  • +4 on Stealth checks
  • -1 CMB
  • -1 CMD
  • lower weapon damage die
  • 3/4 the carrying capacity
  • 1/2 the weight of armor and gear

In 2nd edition, none of those changes seem to be in effect and I can’t find any mention of new ones. So while Gnomes, Goblins, and Halflings are all listed as size Small, it doesn’t seem to make any difference. Are there any benefits or detriments to being Small in 2e?

Data structure & algorithms for super-interval queries on intervals with small integer ends

I would like to have an online data structure that supports inserting an interval, and given a query interval $ I_q=[l_q,h_q]$ answer if $ I_q$ is contained at some interval of the data structure, i.e. if $ I_q$ is a super-interval of some interval of the structure (so the answer of the query is just boolean, no need to output all such intervals on the structure) at the fastest possible time complexity.

I have searched for such a combination, and found out that probably an Interval Tree would be appropriate for my situation, with $ O(\log n)$ interval insertion and overlapping intervals query (so it’s not exactly my desired query, but I think that it could possibly be turned to it. Also I can avoid the output complexity dependence, since the desired output is boolean and therefore on the first match I would know the answer is true).

Furthermore, here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interval_tree) it is stated that:

If the endpoints of intervals are within a small integer range (e.g., in the range [1,…,O(n)]), faster data structures exist with preprocessing time O(n) and query time O(1+m) for reporting m intervals containing a given query point.

Since I also can guarantee that both interval ends are going to be small integers (i.e. not floats, but natural integers up to $ \approx 10^6$ ), what would be the best data-structure/algorithmic way (considering time-complexity of the above two operations) to implement those two operations I would like to have?

If the fastest time-complexity would be an Interval Tree, then how can I modify the overlapping-intervals query to support my query in $ O(\log n)$ time, i.e. not $ O(k\cdot\log n)$ where $ k$ is $ I_q$ ‘s range? However, I am quite interested in the above quoted passage, and how I could possibly (with another data structure, maybe?) manage such a fast complexity, so in that case Interval Trees wouldn’t matter.

Note: In my attempt to test such an algorithm and speed on an Interval Tree, I have found out the following library: https://github.com/chaimleib/intervaltree/blob/master/intervaltree/intervaltree.py where a similar query seems to be implemented on the envelop query with a time-complexity of $ O(m+k\cdot\log n)$ , where “$ n$ = size of the tree, $ m$ = number of matches, $ k$ = size of the search range”, which however is not as fast as I would like (especially considering the $ k$ multiplying factor).

How easy to read are small caps vs lower case?

I’m well aware that text in ALL CAPITALS is harder to read than text in lower case or mixed case, for whatever reason.

But what about Sᴍᴀʟʟ Cᴀᴘs? With a bit of Googling I can’t find any references for the relative ease of readability of small caps. My intuition says Sᴍᴀʟʟ Cᴀᴘs would be easier to read than ALL CAPS but not quite as easy as mixed case… but I know well enough to not trust my intuition. So does anyone have any data or pointers?

Answers with sources and references preferred, but even just some pointers to useful discussion would be helpful.

[My specific context is more related to titles than to body text, for what it’s worth, but titles that need to be readable from a good distance with a lot of other visual distraction nearby.]

need a small script made

payment via papal $ 5

script that spits out a div table. i add urls to a list. each url has a checkbox to choose to put in the div table. i want a login page but not required. tables are horizontal and vertical i choose one when generating the table.

How small can a “Tiny” object be?

Question: How small can something be and still be considered a “tiny object”?

Background: I have a player who is very excited about using Animate Objects soon, and was trying to come up with options for having a group of tiny objects available. Obviously this can include bottles or locks, per the DMG, page 247, and similarly-sized object. It would probably include marbles, because those are smaller than bottles, and still big enough to hurt. How about a lone 2″ blade of cut grass, or a 1″ strand of hair, or a single grain of sand? Each of those is a “discrete, inanimate item” (DMG, pg 246), but they’re considerably smaller than the “tiny” examples.

I know the GM can rule anything at any time, but is there a referenced “minimum” to being tiny, either in a firm manner, or strongly implied? Even though they’re small, a 1″ strand of hair would be magically-empowered by the spell, so I’m not worried about justifying damage. I just want to know if I’ve missed anything.

How small can a “Tiny” object be?

Question: How small can something be and still be considered a “tiny object”?

Background: I have a player who is very excited about using Animate Objects soon, and was trying to come up with options for having a group of tiny objects available. Obviously this can include bottles or locks, per the DMG, page 247, and similarly-sized object. It would probably include marbles, because those are smaller than bottles, and still big enough to hurt. How about a lone 2″ blade of cut grass, or a 1″ strand of hair, or a single grain of sand? Each of those is a “discrete, inanimate item” (DMG, pg 246), but they’re considerably smaller than the “tiny” examples.

I know the GM can rule anything at any time, but is there a referenced “minimum” to being tiny, either in a firm manner, or strongly implied? Even though they’re small, a 1″ strand of hair would be magically-empowered by the spell, so I’m not worried about justifying damage. I just want to know if I’ve missed anything.

Magento 1.9 small image resizing/compression issues

All my ‘small images’ in catalog view appear blurry/poor quality. I’ve tried various methods like ‘setQuality’ but nothing ever changes. I feel like I’ve ran into a brick wall with this.

When clicking into the product however the image is crisp and fine so I’m assuming it’s a resize issue for small images/thumbnails and not an overall compression issue?.

For testing purposes to find a solution I’m working on a fresh/new install of Magento 1.9.4.2 with just 1 product using a default theme.

here’s a link to my product.

http://s646422518.websitehome.co.uk/catergory.html

Please take note of the text ‘Prokofiev’ to see difference in image quality of the small images to the quality once you click into the product.

Any suggestions or things I may have overlooked?

Thanks.

Do saddles made for Small or smaller riders weigh less?

Likewise, do saddles made for Large or larger creatures weigh more?

It seems to me that they would be adjusted as armor would, but I can’t find anything verifying that information.

Weight: This column gives the weight of the armor sized for a Medium wearer. Armor fitted for Small characters weighs half as much, and armor for Large characters weighs twice as much.

I’m not as concerned about the price right now since changing from Medium to Small doesn’t change price anyways, but if you find information on whether that changes for pairs outside of the usual size range (such as a Huge mount or a Tiny rider) it would be useful to know as well.