#(therefore planning to leave them money when you die presumably to which i say HA) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

thesigilsofbaphomet · 4 years

Text

Lucifer Wants What’s Best For You

(And God is Your Enemy)

So... I touched on this in my response to someone talking about using Micheal in Catholic Folk Magic as a protective, social justice spirit. But I cut my overall take short, because it was off topic. But I wanted to talk about it, so, it’s time for one of my rare non-reblog posts on this blog.

I’ll begin by restating my overall premise- If you look at both canonical and folk-loric sources on Satan, you see a figure who simply desires to help people.

The Snake in the Garden

It is important to note that The Serpent in Genesis is not Lucifer/Satan/The Devil. It’s just... a serpent. Like, it’s not even, specifically, a demon. But the serpent, being a magical talking animal who convinces humans to act contrary to the will of God, is commonly seen as a demon. And I’ll go with that.

So, God creates the whole universe. This includes The Garden of Eden, the paradise that God rents to the first humans in exchange for their obedience. They’re allowed to eat from any tree in the Garden, except the tree in the center, known as the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (The ToKoGaE).

Note- God created Eden for Adam and Eve. God is omniscient, meaning all knowing, thus he knows that Adam and Eve will eventually eat the fruit of the tree. The general Christian take is that the tree is a test. However, if you know that the test takers will fail a test, and you know you will give them a rather extreme punishment for that failure, is it not extremely cruel to present that test?

So the serpent talks to Eve, and there’s an exchange, and eventually, the snake convinces Eve to eat ToKoGaE fruit. Giving her knowledge of Good and Evil. And there’s some really weird thing here where suddenly she knows she’s nude, because she ate fruit that gives her moral knowledge, and apparently there’s a moral weight to nudity? And it’s bad? But God made them nude? So God explicitly create humans in a state of Sin and this whole original sin shit doesn’t really fucking hold up if they were created in a state of sin to begin with? I digress. Eve gives Adam the ToKoGaE fruit, now they both know their nude, so they start gluing leaves to their skin with sap or something (I refuse to believe they had any actual knowledge of how to weave leaves into clothes like it’s just a thing you can do and not something you have to learn how to do, and there’s literally no reason for them to have done that prior, so this is literally the first time they’re trying to use leaves as cover).

And the usual Christian take is that the snake is wrong in this. But... knowledge is good, and God was specifically withholding knowledge from Adam and Eve. So the Serpent was helping them.

Satan Scares a Guy’s Ass

No, literally. A guy named Balaam is riding a donkey and Satan appears to scare the donkey to stop him.

This story makes no goddamned sense, even when you read it in a vaguely modern dialect. But, basically, the Israelites leave Egypt and settle, and the guy who rules the land next to them says “holy shit, that’s a lot of guys, they might come take my shit.” So he sends some messengers to a seer, Balaam, to ask him to curse the Israelites so he can beat them in battle. Balaam says “Ok, sleep here, I’ll tell you what God says in the morning.” In the morning, Balaam’s like “Bad news, guys. God says I can’t go with you. The Israelites are blessed.” The king sends more messengers who are more official looking and they say “Look, dude, our lord will give you SO MUCH HONOR if you come curse these guys for us”

So Balaam says “Look, I don’t care if your king sucks my dick gives me his palace and all his money, I can’t go against God. But stay here, I’ll tell you if he says anything more in the morning (and on reflection, it almost seems like this is explicitly acknowledging that God is just extremely capricious). God tells Balaam, “Ok, go with them, but do exactly what I tell you.” So Balaam saddles his ass up, and goes with them.

And God gets pissed off? Because, I’ll repeat, God is a capricious asshole. So Satan (or, An Angel of the Lord, depending on the translation you read, but the original Hebrew says it’s Satan, who, in Judaism, is an angel of YHWH, and basically exists to test humans) appears, only visible to Balaam’s donkey, and the donkey says “oh fuck that, I’m gonna go to this field over here.” Balaam hits the donkey and the donkey goes back to the pass. So Satan appears again, this time in a narrow pass, so the donkey say “eeengghh...” and tries to, like, slide past Satan by scrapping the wall, and scrapes Balaam’s foot, so, again, Balaam beats his ass. Finally, Satan appears on, like, a narrow bridge, and the donkey can’t turn, can’t just scrape against a wall, and so just lays down. Balaam is, again, pissed off, and Satan opens Balaam’s eyes and asks him why he’s beating his donkey, and God opens the donkey’s mouth so the donkey can be like “no seriously, what the fuck, dude?”

But, so, in Numbers, Satan appears to just stop a guy from doing what God told him not to (and then to) do.

“They go through houses — they go up, they ring doorbells”

In Chronicles, David, king of Israel, decides to have a census. Or Satan tells him to. It’s not clear. In Samuel, David has the idea independently, but in Chronicles Satan tells him to. But anyway. David wants to have a census, which is a pretty reasonable thing. Censuses have a purpose, they tell a government how many people there are, and where they live, and, in America, give data that can be used to decide where and how to spend tax money. But for some reason, authoritarians don’t like censuses.

I want to say more about this, but... it’s literally just “Satan tells David to take a census, God doesn’t like that.” and then God sending an angel to tell David “pick a punishment!”

The Outlier--Job

I feel like a broken record, but, again, this story makes no fucking sense. Job’s super devout, and God’s blessed him. Satan walks up to God and says “Dude, he’s only devout because you gave him shit. Let me take his shit, and you’ll see how devout he really is.” And God says “Ok, sure, but you can’t kill him.”

So Satan just absolutely shits on Job. He gives Job boils, he kills his family, he financially ruins him, and through it all, Job refuses to reject God, so Satan is forced to concede, and God’s like “Haha, told you. Now, Job, how’d you like a new wife?”

This is the one story I’m aware of where Satan is legitimately just screwing with a guy and not trying to help him.

And Satan’s There, Too!

Satan next appears in Zechariah, in, like, a vision, and he’s just sort of there? This is another “The Satan” thing, where Satan is an angel of God whose purpose is to test humans. He doesn’t really do anything, he just gets mentioned as being there.

Then there’s a mention of Lucifer in Isaiah, and, literally, it’s just a reference. He’s not even there, it’s just a throwaway line saying “Lucifer was cast out of Heaven.”

Satan Asks Jesus Out to Some Beers

The last three mentions of Lucifer in the Bible occur in the New Testament, two of them are just Lucifer tempting Jesus.

Mark just mentions that Satan tempted Jesus.

Luke actually describes the temptation. So, Jesus goes out into the desert and fasts for forty days. Lucifer shows up and says “dude, you’re the son of God, just turn this stone into some bread, and have something to eat.” Jesus rebukes him in a “completely missing the goddamned point” way. So Lucifer takes him up to a mountain and says, “Look, dude, come with me, and can rule over everything you see here. It’s all mine, and it’s mine to give to who I choose. Just worship me.” And Jesus rebukes him. So Lucifer takes Jesus up to the top of a temple and says “God gave the angels to you, they’ll protect you, jump off and they’ll catch you.” And Jesus rebukes him again, and Lucifer disappears in a poof of exasperation.

Now, what’s the purpose of this? Well, there’s the standard Christian reading that Satan is trying to lure Jesus away from serving God’s plan because he’s EVIL and his SOLE PURPOSE IS TO OPPOSE GOOD AND THAT’S GOD. But... Ok, so Jesus is the son of God, he’s divine, and, it’s reasonable to assume that he can’t die unless God allows it, because it’s part of God’s plan for him to die in a specific context. So.... why does he fast for forty days? It’s not like he can starve, and he’s divine, so it’s not like he can suffer the pangs of hunger, unless he chooses to, so... is there any meaning in his fasting? I argue not. It’s exactly as meaningless as the act of turning a stone to bread and having a bite.

Then, there’s the second temptation. If we assume that Jesus is benevolent, and divine, and I argue, even as a Satanist, that Jesus is benevolent. I also believe that Lucifer is benevolent and the creator god is the standout as the not-benevolent one in the game. But I expect Christians believe that Satan is evil and Jesus good. Therefore, in Luke 4, Satan says “this world is mine, to give to they who I see fit.” And Jesus refuses to even pay lip service. Despite the fact Jesus ruling the world would presumably be better for people than a world rules by Satan. And Satan is offering that, maybe as a fuck you to God, but he is freely offering up his temporal power to someone who would make the world a better place.

The final temptation, I would argue, is Satan trying to free Jesus from God’s plan that demands he suffer torture and death. He’s trying to show Jesus “you have power of your own, you don’t have to subject yourself to this plan that ends in your death.”

If we interrogate the narrative from it’s own perspective, then Jesus is both God and human, and Satan is appealing to him as a human, saying “you’re a god, you don’t have to do this. You don’t have to die.”

Luke 22 is the last mention of Satan in the Bible, and it just says that Satan entered Judas (not in a sexy way), and Judas went out to talk to the pharisees about how he could betray Jesus. But...well, ok, literally the line is-

3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

4 And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.

Like... it makes me think that a lot of the time, when Satan is mentioned in the Bible, they don’t mean a literal figure named Satan, and they’re using the name poetically to refer to people working against God or Jesus. Because... Jesus’ death is foreordained. It’s part of God’s plan, so why would Satan be involved in Judas’ betrayal of Jesus? Unless this is going back to the Judaic idea of Satan as an angel of God who acts as an adversary of humanity, in which case, Satan is acting on God’s orders to make Judas betray Jesus.

To Infinity and Beyond

So, that’s the extent to which Satan is mentioned in the Bible in anyway, either as a figure never called Satan but often conflated with him, to The Adversary, to Lucifer.

After that, you have to look at folk lore and media, and this is simultaneously difficult, because pretty much anyone can make a story up and it can get traction, and actually kind of easy in this particular case, because... most folk lore is one a single track when it comes to Satan.

Most folk lore involving Lucifer/Satan/whatever you want to call him-

I hear he misses the old names, so, special shoutout to “Little Horn”

-involves a human who wants something, and Satan showing up to give it to them for their soul.

And this comes to a realization I made last year- In these stories, if you take the Christian worldview, Satan is actually... giving these things away for free, not for people’s souls.

I’m pretty sure I talked about this on this tumblr, but I’ll go through it so you don’t have to hunt it down.

In Christianity, your soul is not yours, it belongs to God, so you can’t actually give it away or “sell” it

However, to do so, if your could, would be a sin

In Christianity, or at least Catholicism, conceiving of a sin with full intent to commit it is the same as committing the sin.

Therefore, even if you can’t, technically, “sell your soul to the devil,” if you decide to do so, you have immediately sinned, and in fact, you have committed pretty much the biggest sin there is in Christianity, Apostasy, one which cannot be forgiven by any temporal power, and the forgiveness of is the sole domain of God himself.

ie, If you commit Apostasy, you are immediately condemned to Hell, unless God himself intervenes. If you decide to sell your soul to Satan, you have already committed apostasy, even though that’s not a thing you can actually do.

Thus, when a person resolves to trade their soul for something, they are immediately condemned, their soul already destined for Hell, simply for deciding they would give it to Satan instead of trusting in God. Satan should obviously know how this works, he should be aware that a person just deciding to trade their soul is sufficient, and Satan has no reason to actually give the person anything.

So, given that, here’s what happens- A person wants something, they want it so badly, they decide to sell their soul to Satan for it. Satan is fully aware that at that moment the person’s soul is already his. But then he goes and gives them what they want.

The only possible way to interpret that is that Satan literally wants to help people.

But What About Hell?

So, how does one suppose that Satan just wants to help people if those people are still condemned to Hell for accepting his help?

Well, again, we’re going to go back to my background of having been raised Catholic.

In the Catholic tradition, Hell is not a place of fiery torment, it is not a place where demons break out the medieval torture shit and rend your soul. The torment of Hell, in the Catholic tradition, comes from the fact that God is absent. The Catholic tradition believes that Hell is painful because God’s presence is not there, that those who are in Hell are cut off from God.

Obviously, Catholics believe a lot of stuff is the natural consequence of this, they probably believe that without the presence of God, people are more malevolent in Hell, and so there are probably plenty of “mundane” torments there in addition.

However, I believe that the presence of God is not a perceivable thing. If it were, there should not be any atheists, or even non-Catholics. If you could perceive the presence of God, then why would you ever not believe in that God? Therefore, Hell should not feel any particularly different from life on Earth. But even if it does, that is, even if the absence of God is apparently despite his presence not being so, I contend that the human spirit can become accustomed to anything.

Therefore... Hell is not a place of torment, especially for the sinful who reject God in the first place.

Aside: Is God’s Presence Desirable?

If we look at the figure of God from the Bible, I contend that God is worthy of nothing but contempt and hatred.

God is said to have created the universe and all life in it--so that it might adore and adulate him.

God is, supposedly, Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnibenevolent (The Three Omnis). But he created a world of pain and suffering, and not all of that is the consequence of free will on the part of the person who suffers. You can argue that pain and suffering is a consequence of people choosing to do evil, but that does not explain the presence of suffering innocents. An omniscient being would know that free will would result in some people choosing to harm innocent children. An omnibenevolent being would wish to prevent that. An omnipotent being, creating a world ex nihilo, could create a world where the natural consequence of trying to harm a child prevents or punishes that attempt. It would not affect free will to create a world where trying to hurt a child caused the would-be perpetrator to burst into flames or have an immediate heart attack--just like it does not infringe on free will that we as humans cannot naturally fly and the natural consequence of jumping off a cliff trying to do so is to fall. It would not affect free will to create a world where children are immune to harm. God created a world where children can be harmed, and he chose to do so, knowing it would happen.

God paid disobedience with exile and painful death--when he would logically know that it would happen to begin with, due to his omniscience.

God looked at his “children” and murdered them in droves for disobedience.

In fact, God killed around 25 million people in the Bible, and that’s only counting adult men. Satan is responsible for about 10 specified deaths in the Bible (Job’s seven sons and three daughters), but the number of Job’s servants aren’t given, and they were slain at his prompting as well. But Job likely wouldn’t have had more than a few hundred servants, and even if he had ten times that number, even if he had 10,000 servants, God is responsible for at least 2,500 times as many, in adult men alone.

Altogether, the Bible itself paints an image of God as an abusive, selfish authoritarian who throws his “children” away in a fit of pique, or boredom, or to win a bet. Is this a figure deserving of worship? Of adoration? Of love? Christians seem to believe yes, believing that their creation at his whim is all that is needed to earn such. It is the position of an abused child who loves their toxic parent simply because of their relation, and despite their abuses.

An Image of Satan

So, on the other hand, we have this figure who staged a rebellion against a heavenly authority, who rules over a land eternal where the only torment is the absence of his foe, who we have already examined and found to be an abusive authoritarian.

A figure who has killed not even 1% of the people this authoritarian did, and who freely gives what is needed to those who, essentially, pledge themselves to his domain.

A Matter of Interpretation

In the end, it comes down to interpretation and belief, since we actually don’t have any kind of primary source on, well, anything to do with the Bible, or religion in general, to be honest. Personally, I think that if you’re looking at the Bible as any kind of authoritative source, then this is the only possible honest conclusion. If you believe that God is any way not reprehensibly abusive, then you can’t view the Bible as any kind of authoritative source, at least as regards God.

I’m a Satanist, so of course I’m given to a more sympathetic view of Satan, but given that there is no particular authoritative source for Lucifer (even the Bible would have been written by his enemy), the character of Satan can only really be inferred from non-authoritative sources, and interestingly, whatever a person says about their enemy, those statements are incredibly revealing of the speaker, as well.

I don’t, necessarily, believe that all Christians follow such a reprehensible creed, I don’t even think all Christians who view the Bible as, if you’ll pardon the pun, gospel, do. But I think a lot of Christians do not take any time to honestly evaluate the Bible and what it says about their God.

#God #Satan #Religion #Christianity #Satanism #Lucifer #The Devil

93 notes · View notes

squidproquoclarice · 3 years

Note

For the Sunrise AMA, What was it like writing the chapter where they find Susie? I remember reading that and being like whoa, it was very good.

So this developed gradually. It was another thing where I wanted to respin some of the in-game Epilogue and do my own homage to it rather than just write a totally different 1907. But I also desperately wanted to fix its huge problem of being almost entirely plot device/deus ex machina based writing rather than organic plot and character evolution like the first six Chapters. What we have in-game is nobody having any clue for the longest time Micah’s anywhere nearby so Sadie doesn’t feel obligated to go after him. Then suddenly Sadie knows Micah’s around, he’s a threat with a whole gang of his own, and gosh, conveniently, one of his men is right there in Strawberry to interrogate! And then Cleet spins some yarn about arguing with Micah about killing a little girl and that causing them to go separate ways. So: it’s fairly nonsensical that Micah could be operating a large, violent criminal gang and even be mentioned by name in the papers without Sadie as a very seasoned multi-state bounty hunter having any Goddamn clue he’s around. It’s also fairly nonsensical that a vicious sadist like Micah would just let Cleet walk away from the gang after crossing him and proving he’s “weak” in Micah’s eyes. I tried to patch some of that as best I could. Micah not being seen or identified by anyone got explained as his level of violence deliberately leaving no survivors--which is fitting with his in-game actions. I also ended up revealing he has practical reason to do so given his distinctively identifiable eye patch. I did take that one aspect from the High Honor “go for the money” ending and transport it to the fight up on the ridge, and explained it as Arthur breaking Micah’s eye socket and the bone splinters in the eye needing its removal. It felt like a selfless Arthur who rescued John deserved to leave that mark on Micah for the next eight years for Micah to think about, and not just a selfish Arthur who weirdly decided he cared most about money he didn’t expect to survive to spend. (I’m still kind of “What the fuck?” about the non-logic of the money ending.) As for Cleet, I was leaning towards that issue of killing small children being genuine for him. It could have been Cleet lying, but it did feel like it could be a genuine fracture point. You can be a monster who still has some limits. So I figured they might run across Cleet at a homestead, where that argument about killing a small girl meant Micah shot him and left him to die slowly, because that felt like Micah’s style of indiscriminate “so there, that’ll show you” violence. And Cleet could still be the one to tell Arthur and Sadie that this dangerous “Big Valley Phantom” is Micah, and where to find him. The Hagens were originally one-shot NPCs for Arthur and Sadie helping guide them to their homestead in 1901 on their way up to Adler Ranch for Sadie to say goodbye to Jake before marrying Arthur. I went for Shepherd’s Rest because it would be there on the map in 1907, and it being there in 1901 seemed possible. Then I was reminded of them being there in 1907. I think I dropped a casual mention or two of the Griffiths dropping in on the Hagens while trying to pick up the trail of “Jim Milton” since they would be in the area as an “Oh yeah, someone they knew, they’d probably say hi since they were right there, and the Hagens did say to drop by if that ever happened.” I didn’t do much with it right then given the Hagens didn’t figure into my plans yet (and therefore ended hastily patching some mention of it in later about renewing the friendship that spring when they stopped by...yeah, it’s this kind of thing I’ll probably try to smooth out a bit on the edit) Then at some point I realized it could work for the Hagens to be the ones involved. They were newlyweds in 1901, so they could have a small child. There’s unfortunately always going to be more narrative punch when events involve someone you know rather than Random Citizen #2. I’d also been having the thought that Sadie and Arthur would end up adopting kids in the future, but the survival of a little girl from a violent attack, especially the daughter of friends, would be a reason to make her part of their family. So it all seemed to work together. But a lot of the weight of it hit me only in the moment when I was writing the chapter. I like to let things largely play out as I write them, and this was no exception. So you get both of them riding up and sensing that something’s wrong that the Hagens didn’t meet them as planned, and the stillness of the homestead, and then being reminded of past traumas. Arthur’s reminder of riding up to Eliza and Isaac’s cabin and seeing the silence along with those fresh graves with two crosses. Sadie’s reminder of her own home being broken into, and Jake’s murder and her own ordeal. They’ve got their kids there too, which makes it even harder. And then Sadie deliberately saying she’ll go see about Susannah, and Arthur saying he’ll go check Nils and Margit’s bedroom, is each of them agreeing to shield the other from more direct triggers. Arthur can’t see a murdered small child, and Sadie can’t see a married couple presumably surprised while asleep in bed and then murdered, especially the husband. Finding Susie alive and hiding, and seeing Cleet’s still alive and able to tell them what they need to know sets off two different and disparate missions: taking care of this orphaned and traumatized little girl and their own kids, and hunting down Micah. And the conflict and tension between those does inform a lot of the next few chapters in trying to figure out where their responsibility lies, the nature of duty vs vengeance, etc. It was a really rough chapter to write between the emotions and the aftermath of violence, but I think it’s probably one of my better ones for all that. I knew a lot hung on this one, given the payoff of finding Micah was something that had been left pending and gathering tension for readers who knew it had to happen at some point.

#rdr2 #sunrise ama #sadie adler #arthur morgan #may the sunrise #writing #fic from the parking lot #foundynnel

8 notes · View notes

devourer--of--books · 4 years

Text

Remember that one time I wrote a Tangled AU?

Context

During 2016, I submitted a few stories for Tagatha Ship Week. Not my best work, but some of my most known works nonetheless. Amongst those, I had a Tangled AU that was originally meant to be a one shot (which has been deleted because sweet lord that was bad), then turned into a draft for a multichapter story and then turned into this cursed WIP I completely forgot about, which you can find on both Ao3 and FF.net under the name of ‘blinking in the starlight’.

Every once in a while someone comes across it, as it was the case with ‘if you’re not the bride’ and it would remind me of its existence. But unlike IYNTB, I have no interest in rewriting it or continuing this story.

A few weeks ago I found the original draft for ‘blinking in the starlight’ in my dad’s old computer, so I thought I might do a post no one asked for (some people did, you guys are great, humoring me like that) on what the plot was supposed to be.

But after sitting with it I wasn’t fully satisfied (as usual, fml). So, like the clown that I am, I decided that since we are already here, might as well make it into an actual AU post, mind my language, I’m frustrated.

Blinking In The Starlight: Tangled AU

Okay, so I’m gonna presume that you read the WIP, so if you didn’t, maybe check that out first and then come back to this post. Or don’t, it’s not like it’s a very complex narrative anyway.

Many, many years before this story starts, there was a cruel sorcerer named Rafal.

He tormented the Endless Woods for centuries, extorting kingdoms and stuff, you know, very much a two-dimensional character whose motivations I definitely did not think through. Being evil I guess?

No one could defeat him, because he always somehow ended up knowing the traps were coming and was two steps ahead. No one knew how, so they just like, presumed it was because he was psychic or something.

Until one day, a young vain prince named Arthur of Camelot decides to order a hunt to the big blue falcons, to get their feathers as a present to the girl he was courting, one Lady Guinevere.

Would you believe those birds were Rafal’s spies? Now that everyone was hunting them, they could no longer listen in as easily.

So when Prince Arthur campaigns against Rafal’s evilness and challenges him to a duel in which he tricks the sorcerer and defeats him, stripping him of most his powers (and therefore his immortality), everyone was shook

Don’t ask me how he did it, I honestly do not know

But instead of killing Rafal, Arthur agrees to spare his mortal life as long as he gives him a powerful love potion for Guinevere and never shows his face around Camelot ever again.

Rafal is pissed, but says sure why not, because he knew Arthur would be crushed once the potion effects wore off and Guinevere left him anyway

So yeah, they became King and Queen, everyone thinks Rafal is dead, Camelot became known as the guardian kingdom of the Endless Woods alliance, yada yada.

Meanwhile, Rafal, now mortal and still pissed af, looks for a way to get his immortality back, because he is now old and tired all the time.He goes to one of his oldest allies and they tell him a rumor about a woman named Vanessa who found a way to stay young forever using a bird.

It takes a few years for him to track her down, but when he does, he tries to convince her to show him the bird. Vanessa is like that sounds like a you problem, so he threatens her and she tells him she ate it to save her life during her pregnancy (do not ask me how this works, why she couldn’t have healed herself like usual, I don’t know okay)

Rafal is pissed again, because Vanessa was still looking young, so either she lied or she was omitting something and decides you know what, screw you and murders everyone, trying to find the damned bird.

But then he hears soft singing from the closet. A little girl named Sophie, who apparently had inherited the bird’s ability to restore youth.

First, he thinks of raising her as his daughter. But then, one day she’d try to leave him for a boy, so he decides to trick her into thinking he was that boy, so she’d never want to leave him.

He sells her this bullshit story about everything being a fairytale like the ones her books, makes himself look like a teenager and tells her he is now going to take care of her because they are true loves and whatnot

Using the money from his previous evilness (why am I like this), he builds a tower and gaslights the hell out of her telling her is was to keep the danger outside, when actually he was caging her in. Her guards are all mercenaries and her maids are kidnaped slaves so, hm, that’s nice

He keeps visiting her to restore his youth, but he needs the macguffin Arthur used to take away his immortality (I didn’t specify what it was in my draft, so let’s say its Excalibur, for the sake of storytelling) to restore his full greatness, so he starts a long-long-plan to overthrow Camelot once he gets him hands on the sword.

However, Sophie is a person of her own, even being manipulated and gaslighted. She wants to go outside and see the world. Obviously Rafal won’t let her, and even gives her a ring to summon him and stuff, so she won’t think about going anywhere out of his sight.

But she ends up doing it anyway because she’s Sophie

Now hold on a minute.

Back in Camelot, Arthur has already died, Guinevere ran off with Lancelot and Tedros is a brat, walking around with Excalibur (not knowing how powerful it actually is) playing glorified police officer for the royal guard as a way to prove he’ll be a good king someday.

Festival season is approaching and prince Teddy is on a man-hunt (woman-hunt?) for the thief that has been ambushing noble carriages.

They have some good banter, but the thief always manages to distract him and get away.

Guess who is the thief

It’s Agatha, leave me alone, I was 15 and loved cliches, shut up

Yes, I know I’m now almost 19 and still love cliches, moving on

Agatha is stealing money from the rich like a robin hood pro, because festival season is expensive and poor people need to eat okay

But prince-holier-than-thou keeps showing up so she decides to be petty and steal directly from him. Girl just wanted some gold, but ends up with Excalibur because Tedros is an idiot

So he chases her through the woods for days on end, hot on her trail, and Aric gets caught on the crossfire between them. Agatha presumes from his uniform that there is a castle near and decides to hide there.

Tagatha ends up in Sophie’s tower, and she hides Excalibur to bargain with them.

She strikes a deal with Tedros to show her the festival in exchange for Excalibur.

Agatha is just f this shit im out, she didn’t want the sword in the first place and last thing she needs is going to Camelot with a pseudo-police-officer.

But then Tedros realizes he doesn't know how to go back to Camelot and Sophie makes him promise not to turn Agatha in. Agatha is still skeptical, so he promises to lift taxes for the lower classes and she agrees to be their unofficial guide back to Camelot.

Princes can't break promises, don’t ask

The three of them escape the tower.

Shenanigans ensue.

There’s a scene of Agatha helping people in a tavern and Tedros is like???? she nice????

Sophie finding out that the old wizard from her story was the guy King Arthur supposedly killed and doubting Rafal’s lies.

There’s Tedros explaining his need to be just and abide by the laws all the time due to the pressure of his father’s rep after the three of them nearly die of hypothermia (?)

Sophie telling them about her talent.

Very wholesome really.

Meanwhile tho, Aric finally manages to alert Rafal that Sophie left, and Rafal summons his birds to look for her, figuring out that she had Excalibur (how? Idk)

When the trio reaches Camelot, it’s still a few days before the festival. Agatha says she is done and needs to be on her way, but Tedros (softly, may I add) asks her to stay, at least until the lantern scene/day/tradition/thingy

Their unspoken feelings are all over the place and Sophie decides to play matchmaker.

They stay in an inn (why did Tedros not sneak them into the castle, you ask? I don’t know, don’t ask) and Sophie makes the guy tell them there is only two rooms. She then makes up some balloney about wanting to be by herself, so Agatha and Tedros share a room.

Yeah, you know what I’m doing, don’t you: there’s only one bed.

Some other tropes for a very fluffy chapter equivalent of the score of Kingdom Dance, which is my favorite song in the Tangled Soundtrack, fight me, is such a good ‘falling in love montage’ song

But the fluff doesn’t last long, because the very night of the festival, just as you can almost hear Tagatha singing ‘and at last I see the light’, Rafal’s birds find Sophie and take off her ring by force.

Rafal crashes the festival, stealing Excalibur from Sophie and unleashing his coupe against Camelot, back to being immortal and super over-powered.

He throws Sophie back in her tower, and when she doesn't comply and asks him to stop we have a ‘I never loved you’ ‘you were always just a bird to me, a dumb bird’ moment and Sophie is just destroyed because aside from her new friends (whom she believed were dead) Rafal is all she has.

Back in Camelot, complete mayhem is being wrecked, bloodshed and stuff. Agatha manages to rescue Tedros before his execution and they figure out that they need to rescue Sophie and get Excalibur to kill Rafal for good.

“Insert part one of TLEA here”, bitch, I kid you not, that’s exactly what I wrote wtf even is this draft

Somehow it all leads into this big confrontation, in which Sophie strips Rafal of his immortality using the sword but can’t bring herself to kill him. So she asks Tedros to do it, so he can prove himself to his kingdom.

I do not know where Agatha is during this, but I’m pretty sure she’s like, fatally wounded or something

Rafal reveals to Tedros why Arthur spared his life the first time and offers him a potion to make Agatha return his (already mutual, you idiot) feelings.

Tedros is like, nah, I’m gonna kill you, and Rafal is like are you sure she won’t just ride off and leave you like your mama?

And Tedros is just, honestly, man, I’m not, but I’m not gonna force her. Then some analogy about caging birds and Rafal is dead.

Yey, happy ending.

So Tedros and Agatha are left in this limbo, because she poor and she a criminal and he a prince.

Tedros decides to have Agatha take the glory of killing Rafal to redeem her in the public eye, grants her a title, she makes Sophie her lady-in-waiting and they all live happily ever after the end.

#school for good and evil #The School for Good and Evil #school for good and evil series #blinking in the starlight #sge #Sophie of Woods Beyond #Agatha of Woods Beyond #tedros of camelot #Tagatha #tagatha ship week 2016 #Rafal

14 notes · View notes

lady-griffin · 5 years

Text

Argubably this long rant doesn’t matter since Petyr is dead in the show, but I couldn’t help myself, since I’ve seen people say that Baelish would never be outsmarted and die like that…so here you go.

It is basically accepted as canon that Petyr Baelish is one of the smartest characters in the story and is some Machiavellian-type genius --- manipulating everyone to his whim.

But is he?

Don’t get me wrong, Baelish is certainly intelligent and definitely very clever. And he benefits a lot from the fact that no one ever really thinks he is a real threat, or at least that’s the case in the books. In the show, he’s more seen as a necessary evil by the characters who work with him. They don’t trust him, but they need him for their own agenda.

And Baelish uses people not seeing him as a threat or seeing him as a means to an end to his advantage. But is he some great puppet master, pulling every single string?

Not really.

The idea that Baelish is some kind of absolute mastermind who planned for everyting to work out to his benefit is fueled by several factors –

1. That is a very common assumption of intelligence and is very common trope in media, particulary with political-type or scheming characters. Intelligence is easier to show or prove when it is revealed that said character had everything planned form the start (no matter how implausible that is).

1.A I see this a lot with chess being used as a shorthand to show a character’s intelligence. The intelligent character could’ve won the game at any time and when they suddenly have to leave, they quickly finish the game in one move (to the surprise of their opponent).

2. And in the books, Baelish’s actions and overall scheming have only benefited him, the backlash hasn’t caught up to him…yet

Looking at Baelish and a lot of his actions (both in the show and books), he’s kind of throwing himself everywhere and essentially working with whatever is thrown at him.

The best example is Joffrey sending the Catspaw to kill Bran (because of what he heard from Robert) and Littlefinger takes advantage of Catelyn’s belief that it was Tyrion/Jaime/Cersei (or at least one of them) that sent the assassin, based on whatever Bran saw. And because of that opportunity Baelish is able to further cement the Stark vs. Lannister conflict, which he started by having Lysa send that letter to Catelyn.

Littlefinger himself didn’t plan for Jaime to push Bran out the window or for Joffrey to send an assassin to “impress his father” (Joffrey’s own plan is insane), but boy did he ever take advantage of those extra factors.

And that’s smart, there’s no denying that, but eventually Petyr’s own self is going to catch up with his ambition.

What I mean is that Petyr is fueled by spite and hatred. He wants to stick it to all the nobles in Westeros whoever looked down at him. And every time he gets away with something, he gets bolder and more reckless. The best example of that is Littlefinger kissing Sansa right outside Lysa’s window.

Petyr has a need (that’s growing) to not only be the smartest man in the room, but to have everyone know it.

Basically, Petyr is a very flawed man, who isn’t as smart as a lot of fans see him as or more accurately, doesn’t have everything planned from the beginning and is basically one slip away from it all crumbling around him.

And there are certain lines that indicate all of this to us.

“[Petyr] was always clever, even as a boy, but it is one thing to be clever and another to be wise.” (AGOT, Catelyn IV)

I really think this gives us the first clear image of who Petyr is as a person – the outline of his character and overall his limitations. Someone who is clever, but as we quickly see, hasn’t become any wiser in his years.

“In King’s Landing, there are two sorts of people. The players and the pieces.”

“And I was a piece?” She dreaded the answer.

“Yes, but don’t let that trouble you. You’re still half a child. Every man’s a piece to start with, and every maid as well. Even some who think they are players.” He ate another seed. “Cersei, for one. She thinks herself sly, but in truth she is utterly predictable. Her strength rests on her beauty, birth, and riches. Only the first of those is truly her own, and it will soon desert her. I pity her then. She wants power, but has no notion what to do with it when she gets it. (ASOS, Sansa VI)

This is Sansa’s introduction to the official “game” and the “rules.” But we should take this overall idea not as an objective fact of how the world is, but how Petyr (and others) see the world. It’s not necessarily inaccurate, but definitely a limited scope of how things work.

And Petyr’s criticism of Cersei, also shows how blind he is of his own limitations. And honestly, having Petyr think he himself is this great player, only for him to be nothing more than a piece, is very ASOIAF.

Petyr wants power, but like Book!Cersei, has no idea of what to do with it once he has it. Petyr’s all about scheming and getting himself higher and higher, but what would he do once he got to the highest point.

He’s great at creating chaos and benefiting from it, but that can only benefit him for “a limited time.” Particularly since his goal is to eventually be in charge and rule – creating chaos and conflict, isn’t going to help him with that.

Now as he’s the Regent Ruler of the Vale, the cracks are beginning to show in his way of thinking and how he operates (as he also seems to be drinking more and is getting more bold (super creepy and gross) with Sansa – which is not great for his own plans, since he’s pretending to be her dad)

“Everyone wants something, Alayne. And when you know what a man wants you know who he is, and how to move him." (ASOS, Sansa VI)

This is how Littlefinger views the world and people, but it’s also a key to how Sansa should start viewing Littlefinger.

What does he want? Who is he really? How can she move him?

And while I think Sansa should be considering those three things, this idea certainly has holes on it.

Littlefinger is use to operating on tangible wants and desires, a woman (or man) for the night, money, a drink, and so on. And even other less than tangible desires like status or justice, we have seen Petyr dangle those wants in front of people’s faces and take advantage.

But as we have seen with ASOIAF, people are more than a bit complex and have conflicting desires within themselves.

For instance, Jon wanted nothing more than to be Lord of Winterfell, to have a wife and a son of his own. To do his father proud and yet when that was offered to him by Stannis he refused.

Though that might actually be to Petyr’s point. Stannis didn’t know what Jon truly wanted and therefore doesn’t really know who Jon is, and thus can’t move Jon to his own whim. Which I might break down further (at another point).

But back to Petyr.

How is he trying to move Sansa?

He offered Sansa the chance to go home, but that was a lie and Littlefinger has no plans to bring Sansa back home.

It honestly seems like Littlefinger thinks Sansa’s desire to return home is a temporary desire. And to some extent is working with what he presumes is Sansa’s true desire, which was her old desire, to be queen and have her romantic dreams come true.

Petyr, because of his own desires, is not fully aware of Sansa’s true desires, which means according to his own theory, he doesn’t know who she truly is and will have more difficulty controlling her.

“Clean hands, Sansa. Whatever you do, make certain your hands are clean.” (ASoS, Sansa VI)

There are many flaws in this ideology.

For one thing - to accomplish anything, especially lasting change or permanent status (the power and respect Petyr wants) you have to get yourself dirty.

I don’t mean doing horrible things and playing dirty. I just mean you actually have to do something. You can’t just sit behind-the-scenes trying to accomplish what you want, you actually have to do it. You need to take an actual risk and put yourself in harms way.

Also, Petyr’s hands are so dirty at this point (in regards to doing crimes).

To name two of his recent best hits…

He killed Lysa and there were two witnesses to his crime.

He has Sansa Stark – who is wanted for regicide (because of Baelish). If Sansa gets found out before Petyr’s “grand plan” can unfold, he’s fucked.

And –

Several people are looking for Sansa Stark (and have an idea who Alayne is)

Several people don’t want Petyr Baelish to be Lord Regent/Lord of the Vale

And some just don’t want Alayne Stone around or don’t want her to marry Harry.

And that’s just naming three separate aspects of essentially one-single problem. There’s more that can affect the Vale and Petyr’s plans.

Two major ones being the Others and Daenerys and her dragons.

But also, the growing restlessness of Westeros (and the Vale), Winter is coming (not the monsters, but like just food shortage) and then there’s the Mountain Clans and there are just so many potentially pitfalls with his plan.

Petyr, to me, is not really a major player. He certainly has had a lot of influence and has cast a large shadow over this world…but,

As Petyr himself explained, every piece has their own agency and desires and certainly can do a lot of damage, but that doesn’t mean they themselves are important in the grand scheme of things.

And Petyr isn’t a major character himself (in the literal story) as he’s a part of Sansa’s story.

I just find it really interesting (not surprising though) that he’s been built up in the fandom as this absolute Machiavellian genius who’s 20 steps ahead of everyone, when honestly it seems like he’s juggling several knives and each time he doesn’t get cut, he adds another knife.

And his time (in the books) might be coming to an end sooner than we think.

#asoiaf #a song of ice and fire #Littlefinger #Petyr Baelish #Sansa Stark #Sansa #GOT #game of thrones #asoiaf meta

181 notes · View notes

thetravelersjournal · 6 years

Text

D&D Origins- Lady Naïlo

I’m not really sure if this counts as a rough draft or not.

I was writing this for a campaign me and my friends were doing, and was planning on actually writing about our adventures, but for multiple reasons I won’t get into, the whole thing fell through. I had ended up writing this, though, and I felt it was a shame to just let it collect dust. I hope you enjoy! (And it should also be noted that some slight college humor was added in here. Everything goes in a D&D campaign)

Lady Naïlo opened the door to her master’s study. The dark room was musty, a thick layer of dust covering everything. As she walked into the room Naïlo flicked her wrist, causing every candle in the room to spontaneously ignite. At the end of the room was a desk hiding a rather comfortable chair, which, after staring at for a moment, she sat in. She peered at the dusty books and scrolls that lined her late master’s desk. She held one up, carefully blowing the dirt off. The scroll listed out the magical incarnation of Spider Climb, which allowed the user or person of choice to climb walls. She placed the scroll into her bag, quickly looking for a certain document.

She had always found it weird that her parents had hired a male Drow as her private caretaker and teacher, but never questioned it once she had seen her master’s power with her own eyes. He had taught her many things, magic and otherwise. He was the reason that soldiers were now scouring every inch of the mansion, looking for her head.

She found a few more magical documents, placing them in her bag as well, before finally coming across what she was looking for. She read through the letter multiple times, making sure she could remember most of it in case she had to destroy it later.

To my dear Naill,

If you are reading this, I can only presume that not only have I been killed by the Priestess, but you planned to be too. Perhaps it was selfish of me to raise you against your parents- no, against Drow society’s standards. I cannot even apologize. It has always been my greatest hope that I can lead someone to make a change in this dark world we live in… though, if you are reading this, perhaps now is not the time.

I showed you love and respect, something frowned upon down here, which you, in turn, clung to desperately. I remember seeing your eyes shine for the first time when I told you that you did a great job casting Eldritch Blast, after only your third attempt. You may have more kindness and gratitude than most Drows, but you still have a long way to go. Therefore, I am leaving instructions on how to leave the Underdark, to the surface world above. There, people will look down on you because of your race, spitting insults and giving false truths. However, please show them as much kindness as I have shown you during our time together. Learn as much as you can from the world above, so that you can make a true difference down here- something that I was never able to do.

Love always,

Doloroso’amor.

Lady Naïlo bit her lip, a heavy tear coming to her eye, which she swiftly wiped away. How long had it been since her master passed away? While her master hadn’t been killed, she could plainly see the satisfaction in more than a few people’s eyes when his death was announced. She herself had done absolutely nothing, and continued to live in the Underdark like any other Drow. That is until yesterday, when she accidentally showed some mercy to a slave in front of the Priestess herself. The action had not gone unnoticed, and now Naïlo had to leave before anyone noticed she was missing.

But what her master was asking of her… could she really show kindness to surface dwellers? Most Drows were expected to hate other races upon birth, and now to even live among them…

Not that she had a choice. It was either head to the surface or be brutally murdered by the Priestess of Lolth. She sighed in disgust after only thinking the name. She held no desire to serve Lolth (or any god for that matter) and hated the fact that her teachings were always shoved down her throat by the people around her. She wondered if perhaps necromancy wasn’t the best path for her.

The door suddenly burst open, a male guard shouting, “Halt!” upon entry. Naïlo silently cursed- she had spent far too much time here. She swiftly stood to her full height, towering above the soldier. “You dare speak to me with that tone of voice?” she glowered. Thankfully, Naïlo was taller than most elves, and was considered even more attractive than the Priestess, and she used this to her advantage.

The soldier trembled from a mix of fear and lust. “The Priestess of Lolth demands an audience with you,” he said, somewhat softly this time.

Lady Naïlo bent down, her cleavage plainly visible from her dress. She stared into the eyes of the man with pure loathing. “Do you wish to die?” she asked.

“N-no! Er, I mean… Priestess’s orders?”

Naïlo looked at him a little longer before simply stating, “Leave, and tell no one that I was here.”

“I’m s-sorry, but I have orders-,” the guard started to say.

Naïlo glared at the man, causing his face to lose the remaining color it had in it. “Leave!” she declared.

“Y-yes ma'am!” he cried, quickly exiting the room.

Naïlo let out a sigh. She didn’t have much time now. Taking her bag (and a few more random scrolls for good measure) she hurriedly made her way out of the mansion.

Lady Naïlo returned to the present, looking at the bottle of Evermead in her hand. She groaned, her head spinning as she tried sitting up. She just couldn’t hold her liquor.

It had been months since she had left the Underdark. Upon arriving at the surface, she tried performing various odd jobs and tasks for money, none of which she was really any good at. Only at her last job did she have any success, and she now used the money she earned to try to drown her misery.

Even when she tried to follow her master’s advice, glares and insults hit her at almost regular intervals. Thankfully, most people didn’t bother her because of her attractiveness, but at the same time, most didn’t even try talking to her. She moaned, shoving her chest onto the table and face-planting into them. She was just about to die of suffocation when she heard a gruff voice call out, “Hey there, jiggly tits!”

Out of the many insults that had been thrown her way, this was by far the strangest among them. She looked up irritably at the man who was staring at her bosom. Had she been sober, she might have ignored the comment, but her morals had gone as quickly as her drink had.

“How dare you, you insignificant worm… how dare you talk to me like that!”

The man’s smile only grew wider, “Ay! Feisty! You’re my kind of woman, jiggly!”

Naïlo stood up, only to grasp the chair she had been sitting in for balance. She looked dejected at the man, waving the bottle in his face. “Vermin! To think someone as lowly as you is even talking to me!” She took a swig from her bottle, only to realize it was empty. She cursed angrily, letting her hand drop to her side.

The man glanced at the bottle in her hands, the gears in his mind overworking themselves. Suddenly he said, “Hey, hows-a-bout you join our party?” He tilted his head to a large group near the back of the tavern. “We could use your necro-mumbo-jumbo!” Apparently her necromancer abilities had been the subject of many rumors since her first stay in the small town.

Naïlo looked at the party without even trying to hide the look of disgust on her face. Not only were they all male, but they were all filthy. But at the same time, her master’s words came back to her through her drunken haze. Perhaps this was the change she needed…?

She sighed, swallowed up her pride and said, “Perhaps. What is it you need my skills for?”

Lady Naïlo belongs to me.

#journal entry #lady naïlo #d&d #dnd #drow #necromancy #extra #rough draft #canon?#i do hope i can write some more of her in the future

0 notes

jenniferramona1 · 6 years

Text

Which Visitation Schedule is Right?

Which visitation schedule is the right one for you and your child?

Visitation schedules are not “one size fits all”.

While each county has a local rule visitation schedule, these local rules are more of a guideline than a rule. What this means is that each county must have a default schedule that the court considers as the least amount of time that the court generally awards to a fit parent. This gives parents an idea regarding what to expect, and perhaps this will guide the parents toward agreement.

The schedule the court orders must be in best interest of the child. Generally, Utah courts favor schedules that allow the child to see each parent frequently, especially when the child is very young. The idea is that the child needs frequent contact with each parent to promote bonding.

youtube

So what if the local visitation schedule is not the ideal schedule for your child? Although Ohio courts often rely on the county’s local visitation schedule as a “jumping off point” so to speak, the court (or the parents, by agreement) may alter the schedule in any way which is in the best interest of the child. The term “local rule” is sometimes misleading – there is NO RULE which REQUIRES a court to order the local rule visitation schedule as your visitation schedule. It is simply a guideline. Usually Utah Code 30-3-33 is used. You should review that law.

So if the local rule visitation schedule does not work for you, then what schedule should you ask for? What schedule would work best for you and your child, and be fair to both parents? In other States, Supreme Courts have posted publications on about how to handle parent time and living apart. You read the fine print (under “Limitations of this Guide”, it says that the guide only represents the opinions of the authors, and is does not represent the legal opinion of the Courts of any lawyers. The Introduction to the guide presents the guide as a “resource for the creation of sensible parenting time schedules”. The Introduction goes on to say that the guide “fosters fair and creative parenting time schedules based on children’s developmental milestones and best interests”.

youtube

That guide has 14 parenting schedules to choose from. The guide also discusses the author’s opinions regarding parenting time needs of children at different ages.

It is better to think of local rule visitation schedules as a floor, rather than a ceiling. A fit parent is going to get AT LEAST that much parenting time, probably more. It may not be that exact schedule – not every family has the same work schedule. Some families work second or third shift, some families live several states apart.

Is my spouse entitled to 1/2 of my retirement when we divorce?

Retirement plans are often the most significant asset of a marriage, often worth even more than the couple’s house. Therefore, people are naturally worried about what is going to happen to that asset when the couple divorces.

In Utah, all assets are presumed to be marital, and therefore subject to division, UNLESS the husband or wife shows that some of the asset is separate property. With retirement assets, an experienced family law attorney can help you show the Court what portion of the retirement was yours before marriage, which is called tracing. The attorney can then help you retain your separate property, leaving the rest of the retirement, the portion that was acquired during the marriage, subject to division in the divorce.

There are different ways to trace different kinds of accounts, and it may require the assistance of a financial expert to testify for the court to preserve your pre-marital interest in a retirement account, but it can often be done.

Free Consultation with Child Custody Lawyer

If you have a question about child custody question or if you need to collect back child support, please call Ascent Law at (801) 676-5506. We will help you.

Ascent Law LLC8833 S. Redwood Road, Suite CWest Jordan, Utah 84088 United StatesTelephone: (801) 676-5506

Ascent Law LLC

4.9 stars – based on 67 reviews