#like there are big issues with the story on a logic and character level

[fictionadventurer]

I love setting fantasy around and after WWI. It's such a good combination. WWI was a loss-of-innocence on a societal level. There had been this assumption that technology and progress could solve all our problems and make us better people, and then WWI comes and shows us horribly and violently that it does not, and then in the aftermath we have to deal with what this means for us as a society and as people.

Throwing magic into that is a perfect thematic fit, because magic and technology are basically the same thing--people trying to impose their will upon nature. It can do good things or terrible things, but the issue is not necessarily the technology or the magic itself, but the hearts of the people using it, the cost to bring it about, the drain on resources and the effect on the environment and people. In the aftermath of a major conflict, we have to take a long hard look at ourselves and the choices we've made and will continue to make. Are the benefits worth the cost? What is the true nature of man--can we ever trust ourselves again? Have we progressed to a better stage of humanity or reverted back to beasts? There is just so much to explore there. The WWI connection has been built into the genre ever since Tolkien, and it continues to be relevant to our modern world.

#random thought of the day #adventures in writing #fantasy #wwi #history is awesome #i've been thinking about this since i reread chunks of 'the fairy's daughters' last week #i started writing that not long after 'rilla of ingleside' first sparked my wwi interest #and i didn't know nearly as much about the war back then #i managed to hit upon a core truth that makes the central story pretty compelling #like there are big issues with the story on a logic and character level #but the core thing is that the fae have cut off contact with the human realm after seeing what horrors they were wreaking with technology #but the humans distrust my half-fairy girls because they're afraid of what they can do with magic #the girls fit in nowhere #and neither side realizes they're both making the same mistake #trusting or distrusting a certain method of imposing one's will on the world #and forgetting that it comes down to the choices of the person who has access to the technology or magic #and that theme is strengthened because it's a twelve dancing princesses retelling #so the story pivots around one human man who is trusted with a powerful magical item because he has a good heart #and my explanation here is really bad #but what i'm getting at is that the history weaves together with the fantasy here in really cool ways #because the specific conflict of post-wwi lends itself really well to this magical setting #i've also got my story idea where the spanish flu is replaced with a plague that gives people animal-shapeshifting abilities #so people are literally having to grapple with their beastly natures #which plays out a different aspect of the post wwi conflict #and no matter what form it takes wwi is just a really good setting for fantasy hence the above post #that refuses to put the words in my head into sensible order #i hope maybe a little of this makes sense

[cheeseanonioncrisps]

Been thinking about Puss in Boots: The Last Wish and what makes Death the Wolf such an effective villain, and like… character design and voice acting is certainly doing a lot there, don't get me wrong, but I think there's something else at play.

Death is the most terrifying character in Puss in Boots, because he's the only one playing the genre straight.

The premise of the Shrek films has always been that they're normal, modern people living in wacky fairytale land.

The evil king uses his magic mirror as a dating app. The fairy godmother uses business cards to contact her clients. Her workers consider unionising over their lack of dental plan.

Puss in Boots 1 kinda broke the mould in that— while there are plenty of modern elements to how the characters act and how their world works— it's more specifically intended to be characters from the world Zorro living in wacky fairytale land. But the point still stands.

The aim of the Shrek films and spin-offs is to subvert common fairytale tropes for comedic effect. What if the princess fell for the ogre? What if Prince Charming was an entitled dick? What if Goldilocks teamed up with the three bears and started a crime family?

But Death? Death, for the most part, isn't playing that game.

No character questions why he doesn't just kill Puss outright. There are no gags about him being inconvenienced by Jack Horner losing so many men. Nobody makes any self-aware fourth wall breaking jokes about why he bothers with the whole whistling thing.

We all know why he does the whistling thing. It's the same reason why Little Red Riding Hood has to go through the whole "what big eyes/ears/teeth you have, Grandma" rigamarole. The same reason why the wolf takes care to knock before blowing the little pigs' houses down.

The Wolf is scary because he's the only actual fairytale creature in this entire setting. He's not bound by rules of logic or common sense, or his own will, he's bound by the narrative.

And that's also why he backs down at the end.

The first time he and Puss fight, in the bar, Puss is arrogant. The second time, in the Cave, Puss is scared out of his wits. It's the third time, on the wishing star, that Puss learns his lesson. Of course the Wolf backs down after that! The rules say he has to.

But, on another level, there is also the issue of Puss realising that he wants more from his life than just to be a legend.

They say "legends never die", but the most famous part of any given legend tends to be the story of how the hero finally bites the dust.

And "he was such a great fighter that Death himself had to kill him off, personally!" is just the sort of ending that would fit the legend Puss has constructed around himself. In a sense, the Wolf is giving Puss exactly what he proclaims to want— the chance to go down in history.

Puss realising he doesn't want that anymore is the catalyst for sending the Wolf away. Through his own egotistical and reckless attitude, he turned himself into a story and thus summoned a narrative device. Only by choosing to value his life over the legend is he able to escape that trap.

The Wolf's defeat is both the natural ending of the story that he and Puss have been playing out since the film began, and a rejection of the natural ending to the story Puss has been telling about himself since he first became the hero of San Ricardo.

#puss in boots: the last wish #pibtlw #rambles #meta #puss in boots #puss in boots meta #puss in boots the last wish #puss in boots the last wish spoilers #death the wolf

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

[Text: Tell me, what do you think of people actually liking the character development in season 4-5 and the show's treatment of mental health? [Redacted] thinks that and she's the mother of a teenager]

Re liking the show: I generally assume that they have poor taste and/or media literacy.

Re the mental health rep: I generally assume that they're incredibly privileged and/or ignorant.

I'm posting this as an image and not an ask response specifically because I will not participate in fandom drama or shaming. This blog exists specifically so that people can actively choose to engage in my content and so that I can post critical thoughts without dragging their source into some petty fight. So I'm not going to talk about the named individual. Instead, I'll replace them with the show's head writer and talk about him in a similar context.*

He's pretty famously denied that Chloe suffered any abuse, ignoring her obvious neglect, which came from both parents, just in different forms. When you pair that with how the show handles people like Gabe and Jagged Stone, we see a clear pattern of the show ignoring the devastating effects that abandonment and neglect can have on a person, especially if they're a child.

Now you could look at that and say, "The head writer condones abuse! He's a monster!" But I prefer to go the more likely route and assume that he's a privileged middle-class cis white man who has never had to deal with those issues or support someone who has, so he has no idea how to handle them properly or that they even need to be properly handled. There's every chance that he's a loving, kind man and a fantastic father who just happens to not be very good at writing a complex topic that he clearly has no understanding of or desire to learn about. I apply similar logic to fans who share his opinions. Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence or ignorance.

And all of the above is assuming that we're talking about someone who thinks that the show is objectively good or that the mental health rep is good, which are big assumptions. It's fully possible to enjoy a piece of media that you know is objectively bad or even "problematic" in some way.

Personal confession time: is Loonatics Unleashed an objectively terrible show that you should never, ever watch? Absolutely. 100%. Are Rev Runner and Tech E. Coyote two of my favorite characters who will live rent free in my head until the day I die? Yep! I pulled up a YouTube highlight real as I was writing this and those dorks still make me smile even though the show is terrible on multiple levels and I know that I'm not alone in that sentiment. Those two clicked with a lot of people for some reason.

A piece of fiction need not be good for you to love it and you don't need to justify your love for a piece of fiction if you're not claiming that it's good. Similarly, people hating that piece of fiction or pointing out flaws in it is not a reflection on you in any way shape or form. You can even agree with their criticism and still love the piece of fiction. This approach to media - loving a thing in spite of its flaws - is normal and healthy and I'd really love to see it make a comeback in younger fandoms.

Like, I cannot emphasize this enough, most fandoms consider it perfectly normal to have lots of fans who are critical of the source or who have even lost interest in the source for one reason or another, but they still like some element of the source enough to want to create/consume fan content for it. These more critical fans arguably make some of the best fan content because looking at canon and saying "That's nice, let me show you how I'd do it" often leads to some of the most complex stories that you'll see in fandom spaces. Stories that can often blow canon out of the water for TV shows and movies since fanfic isn't limited by budgets or studio policies or marketability concerns. Fans who think that the source is perfect tend to just write fluff or romcom type fics, which is not a dig! I love bother of those genres! But woman does not live on fluff alone.

Obviously there's some complexity here because who decides if a show is bad? Saying "it's okay that you like a terrible thing" can certainly sound like an insult and prompt a feeling of needing to defend the thing, which is why I don't fight with fans who like the show. There's really no need to convince them that the thing they like is bad. Do I think it is? Yes. Does it matter if they disagree? No, not really. At worst, they create stories with similar issues and, well, they're not the only ones and fighting with them isn't going to stop them. You're much better off focusing on creating your own good media and trying to get that popular. Heck, even if you made the head writer see all of Miracuous' flaws, it wouldn't change anything. The show is already made.

So, yeah, I don't really assume anything bad about people who think that miraculous is good. I know lots of wonderful people who have terrible taste in media and I'm still friends with them. I just don't take recommendations from them.

It's important to remember that, when you're online in a fandom space, a person is condensed down to a very tiny snapshot of who they are and judging a person solely off of their thoughts regarding a poorly written kids show is a dangerous path to tread. Like, looking at this blog, you might assume that I spend all of my time thinking about miraculous and obsessing over its flaws, which is very much not the case. I actually have this blog specifically so that I don't obsess over miraculous' flaws because I've found that, when something is bothering me, writing it down or talking to someone about it is the best way to stop thinking about it. Even then, most of my posts are reblogs of stuff I come across while browsing my tumblr feed, which is not solely miraculous content. I mostly interact with the show by creating non-salty fanfic that I honestly enjoy writing and find to be a relaxing, positive outlet.

It's human nature to judge and it's totally normal to think that a person's an idiot because of something they post online, but be careful to not lean into those thoughts too hard. At the end of the day, Miraculous is just a stupid kids show that will fade from the popular consciousness a few years after it stops airing. If it and/or the fandom are negatively affecting your mental health, then it's okay to step away for a while or use the block button. It really is your best friend. I enjoy being critical about Miraculous specifically because it's not that important. While I do think that kids deserve better media, I don't think Miraculous is some terrible evil harming the youth. I'm not horrified when a kid watches it, it's just not a show that I'd encourage them to watch and, if the kids was close to me, we'd spend a lot of time talking about the bad things that the show showcases from time to time. There are lots of episodes that are fine and I can think of way worse kids shows. Shows that tell their horrifying morals really well, making a kid far more likely to pick up on them and internalize them.

*Note that I only feel comfortable talking about the head writer like this because he's a public figure with an active social media presence AND because I'm not @ing him. If he was a private person or if he was not a professional creator, then I would not talk about him like this and even in that context I try to avoid it whenever I can. You can think that he's a terrible writer, but he's still a human being and, as far as I'm aware, nothing he's done deserves people harassing him.

I absolutely understand how devastating it can be to see a story you love get ruined by the creative team. The first time that happened to me, the life lesson I came away with was, "I will no longer put my happiness in the hands of another creator. I will enjoy stories, but I will temper my expectations and remember that they're just another human being and it's completely possible that their vision for this seemingly awesome story may end up being terrible."

#ml writing salt #ml writing critical #ml fandom salt #fandom salt #ask response

[toskarin]

A while back I feel like you mentioned an RPG that offered a villainous route that went full tilt and really delivered... to the point where most people felt bad about playing it.

I'm curious, how would you design an evil/villainous story that feels good to play while being unquestionably evil?

this ended up being rambly so it's below a break to save your dash

I think a big part of villain routes that a lot of games slip up on is assuming that the average player can act in self interest without reverting to a metagame mindset, because what actually encourages people to be selfishly villainous tends to play out in the long term, and games with structured stories can just be walked away from

in other words, a lot of the issue comes down to something inherent to interactive narratives: when the easiest path forward is checking out, your player will almost always check out. a nihilistic villain arc rarely works if you want emotional investment from the player, because a nihilistic player is going to check out

this means that, in my opinion, a good villain route that makes you feel bad usually falls into one of two categories:

"I know I am no longer fighting for the greater good or the many, but I like this character enough to want to work in their interest specifically"

"everyone but me is wrong and I, personally, could fix everything if I just had their cooperation. even if I have to force it"

but there's an interesting exception to this that you mentioned in the ask: Tyranny, up until the end (lol), manages to be a game about committing lesser-and-greater evils. through making it clear how much worse noncompliance or indecision could make things, Tyranny nudges the player towards doing objectively awful things on purpose. and it makes them feel bad!

now, to make a villain route that feels good to play, we could just expect the player to check out and make a game that revolves around simply fighting the forces of good (see: Overlord) and making them annoying, but I'd argue that even that feels out of spirit. at that point, you're just looking for snarky ways to dress up the same old villain and hero roles in different colours

so what then? well, to get a villain route that feels good to play, I'd personally revisit those two aforementioned categories. the second one was actually handled pretty well in Wrath of the Righteous and there are shades of the first in Heaven's Feel. why did they work without making the player feel like complete shit?

corruption

there's almost nobody whose moral code aligns automatically with "villainous" acts, so you have to ease a player into accepting them from a baseline. you've gotta go from good intentions, ignorance, denial, justification, and then finally land on that nihilism that was so impossible to kindle safely until that point. give the player something logical and moral to pursue, then just something logical, then just something emotional, and then ride emotion to the end

it's a fine line to tread and you run the risk of coward's pitfalls along the way (making the "good" characters villainous to justify the player acting against them being a common one), but I'd definitely go about it that way. corrupting the player is very rewarding on an emotional payoff level!

[creative-hanyou-girl]

I don't know if anyone else feels this way but I think a big reason why I'm so chill about the changes made to the PJO show from the books is because I kind of look at each other as their own seperate canon.

Like, I read a lot of anime and manga, and anime adaptations have a huge habit for changing plot points for various reasons, and as a fan of said anime and manga, I've found that I can enjoy both versions of the same story even with the differences when I look at them as their own universe or canon. That's not to say I don't want them to be faithful or true to the source material, but if a scene or situation plays out differently for a logical or entertaining reason, than I can still appreciate that deviation from the manga even if I still like the other original version of that part more. And I can even like the reversal way if I feel an anime does something better than even the manga. But if I want to, I can look at certain moments as more canon than others because I got 2 different versions of that same scene or moment.

And, I don't know, I kind of apply that reasoning to the PJO series as well, mainly with the books, the show, and even the musical (not the movies put that right back where it came from). So far I'm loving the TV show, and while I miss some of the things they changed (like the pink poodle), this adaptation really is doing a great job with staying true to the heart and spirit of the original book that I personally am not even really bothered by the changes, especially when I remember that the books will always still be there with it's own version, or canon, of events.

Like, I will say 1 thing I adore in the books that isn't really in the show is the fact that a lot of Percy and Annabeth's "rivalry" during TLT has more to do with the rivalry between Poseidon and Athena. I just really like on how this adds a level of "forbidden friendship/love" to their relationship 'cause I personally eat the forbidden relationship trope up, especially when it's done well like with Percabeth.

Yet, even if this isn't really the reason percabeth have beef with each other in the show, I can still appreciate and enjoy that according to the show's canon, they have issues because they genuinely have problems with each other as actual people rather than their parents' rivalry, because at the end of the day, that's the PJO TV show canon, and I can always turn to the books for that version of Percabeth's "rivalry", as that is the PJO book canon.

Same goes for the characters too. I will always have and love my dark haired Percy and blond haired Annabeth in the books, but I can also welcome and love Walker's Percy and Leah's Annabeth from the show. And so far, they along with Aryan are KILLING IT as those characters.

I can love both versions of the characters.

I can love both versions of the same story.

I can look at both versions as they own seperate canon or mix them together if I so wish too (especially since both versions of PJO are written by the same guy)

And that's ok. The adaptation doesn't have to be a complete copy of the books. It doesn't have to have things play out eactly the same way. The characters don't have to look exactly the way they are described as in the books. And that's ok. I will still always have the books to love and appreciate, but I can also start to love and appreciate the new adaptation for it's new spin and twists to the same story that sets it apart as it's own canon while still staying true to the spirit of its predecessor.

Anyway, sorry if I'm not making a lot of sense. I just think the people complaining about the changes in the show are looking at it all the wrong way. The show has it's own canon just as the books have their own canon, or even the musical. At the end of the day, isn't that kind of cool to have different versions of the same story and characters? Doesn't it give you so many more options to look at the story in different ways that you can prefer or choose from? Doesn't it give you new versions of canon that you choose from? And really, as long as the PJO adaptation, or any adaptation for that matter, stays true to the heart and spirit of the original story and characters, do the changes made really matter?

#anyway sorry for the long post #I've just been seeing a lot of people complaining about the PJO making changes from the books and I thought I give my 2 cents #& I thought about how the show dies make enough changes to certain events or plotpoints that you could look at it as its own seperate canon #and how that actually is kind of cool as it gives us another version of the same story and characters #it's actually really neat to have different versions of the same story ya know #its like. if I ever want the Percabeth that has more of a 'forbidden relationship' thing going on. there's always the book canon to fall on #likewise if I want the percabeth where they're rivals because they have genuine issues w/ eachother. there's the TV show. ya know? #and if I want the Athena that I can at least somewhat believe might actually care for Annabeth. there's the book canon #whereas if I want the Athena I straight up wanna strangle from the getgo. I now got the TV show for that😊 #same with the characters descriptions #I personally still imagine Percy and Annabeth as they are described in the books #but I am positvely loving Leah and Walker's portrayal of TV Percy and Annabeth so much. especially in these last few episodes. #and don't get me started on how much I love Aryan as Grover. he's the GOAT (literally🤭) #anyway thanks for coming to my ted talk #I just think its neat that Ive now got 2. even 3 versions of PJO canon that I can love together and individually at my disposal now #and I just think the people who are complaining about the show aren't seeing it that way and that's why they're whining about changes #like. chill guys. we still have the books. but now we also the show and musical to give us new versions of the same story and characters #and is that not amazing when you think about it? #percy jackson series #percy jackson and the olympians #percy jackson tv show #percy jackson #percy and annabeth #athena #annabeth chase #grover underwood #book vs show #percy jackson books #percy jackson musical #percabeth

[invested-in-your-future]

I don't know if it's just me but I don't give a shit about that last minute lore dump about the brothers god in V9,I find it unecessary like no I don't want to know about these two gods origin I wanna know where Summer and Raven go in the flashback instead

Well that's an issue with entire show, no?

People wanted to see how Yang bounces back, people wanted answers about Summer, about what Raven is up to, about where the things will go after V3.

All the theories about the moon since the trailers, all the questions about Ozpin and Cinder's motives and everything.

And the show just isn't interested in that - it treats it all as a throw-away "boring" stuff.

(seriously how do you take A SHATTERED MOON IN THE SKY and make the explanation boring and pointless?!!)

The Two Gods are Miles and Kerry's babies - their true creative input into the setting that is just theirs. In their eyes its where everything else leads and nothing else matters. For them it "raises the stakes" away from "all the boring stuff" - why watch Yang's recovery when you can have Qrow deliver a monologue about relics or an entire episode about two gods?

Even when dealing with Atlas situation and a pretty solid conflict set-up (that they mishandled), the show can't help but keep going "Hey but what about Salem and relics?! Look she's an approaching threat!"

Everything eventually leads to the two gods now, so it's no surprise that the big infodump of V9 focuses on THAT and Summer stuff feels like a way-too-late afterthought.

But the issue is - the gods are boring and pointless.

And more importantly redundant.

The show already has two ancient beings in conflict, so why add two higher ancient beings? Okay now the show has two ancient beings and two higher beings, so why add another even higher being???

The show already has four concepts of unimaginable power that break logic and rules of the setting and are shrouded in mystery - so why add four relics that do exact same thing but are inanimate? They still have to write Maidens as characters so it's not like it's a shortcut. But oh wait, if four relics do the thing then the two gods will do big thing that breaks the logic and rules and is very dangerous apocalyptic event! But the show already has four beings and four items, each with near-apocalyptic level of powers and a threat of eldritch abominations so why add another layer? But oh wait there's an entire whacky realm where logic doesn't work and even more superpowered things exist!

The showrunners are desperate to make the Two Gods plotline "exciting" but they mistake quantity for quality instead layering bunch of similarly unexciting things on top of each other.

The issues they have with focusing on Two gods rather than fleshing out interesting lore and story aspects on macro level are the exact same issues as with focusing on Jaune rather than on interesting characters and dynamics on micro level.

But that's not all.

There's also a fundamental issue with structure - the Two Gods stuff is completely disconnected from EVERYTHING - the entire setting(characters, countries, everything) that came before they retconed them couldn't be further removed from the concept even if they tried.

So you have weird structural issues where characters are doing something and the narrative is like "but wait, let's switch up to talk about the Two Gods related stuff":

There's this huge conflict between opposing viewpoints in Atlas and character tor-.... BUT WAIT the Relics! Salem is coming! She will start Biblical Apocalypse! The Gods!

Raven is this mysterious character who appears and disappears randomly and is all cryptic a-...but wait Salem! She needs to talk about how scary Salem is! And Relics! Just fill the rest with random nonsense of bandits!

Silver Eyes is this mysterious concept th-...but what if we made allusions to it somehow tying to the Two Gods?! Because, uhhhhh, Two Gods are powerful and scary and they are reason for...stuff!

There's an extreme disconnect where the characters will keep doing things that only tangentially relate to Relics/Gods and then the show will dump like a hour long detour about how Gods are important.

It's almost like they are tacked on concept that doesn't mesh with the rest of anything and writers keep forgetting it's a thing they have to tie things back to (just like Ever After).

Imagine if V9 had no Ever After and was just a road-trip of Team RWBY traversing Vacuo, racing against time to get to the city before Salem gets there as they encounter other survivors, fight monsters and struggle with what they did in Atlas and Ruby ends up actually having moments of self-reflection and learning things about her mother(and the eyes), while Yang gets to confront Raven(who had saved them from the dark void they fell into with her dumb teleport semblance) about everything and Weiss grapples with Atlas and everything she knew being gone and whether there's anything to the Schnee name than just being a destructive capitalist fraud, Blake struggles with lack of purpose and realization that she fixed nothing in Atlas OR Mistral. Meanwhile Blake and Yang finally get to speak about end of V3 and then about having killed a person together, as they finally start to unwrap the tangled mess of conflicting emotions between them and grow closer together.

Imperfect, but at least something.

But no, see that has nothing to do with Two Gods or Four Relics and we can't have that. That also only had one Salem mention too! And no Jaune! We can't have that.

RWBY is real adept at focusing on everything but what audience actually wanted to know.

And when it does, everything is offscreen.

#rwby #rwde #rwby v9 #rwby volume 9 #ruby rose #Summer Rose

[marmar-woff]

So you're just gonna ignore the part where he said he'd eat you alive? Oh! Okay.

Iruma

No.

Your desires are. not. the. same.

Forgive me for ranting, but this level of forgiveness irritates me a bit. I know Iruma hasn't seen the big picture or realized it yet, but what he saw should have been enough to at least not say ¨oh, yeah, you can come back, I'll save your space, it's not like you tried to murder everyone in that school just for the pleasure of seeing the chaos¨.

And when I say the big picture I mean the fact that Kirio is not only there to hurt/torture Iruma, (which it seems he can forgive) but to be part of a plan that could have hurt and why not, killed a lot of demons. Is he going to forgive all that too?

Iruma has just learned that hatred is inescapable, so it's best to use it as an incentive to become stronger. Not a bad life lesson. So I hope one of the next ones will be "It's okay to let someone go", especially when they have set out to hurt you and the people you love. It's been established that Iruma doesn't want to lose anyone, he wants to save them all, he probably has abandonment issues, but I'd be disappointed if he succeeded because "he has a good heart".

You know what I mean. Those characters who get what they want because it's a good/right thing to do and they're good people so they should get it, disregarding all possible logic and end up feeling badly written.

If Kirio is going to redeem himself it better not be because of the kind words Iruma dedicated to him (still salty about Shiida, I need more info to decide if I like that change of heart). You can't build up a character's motivation for years and break it in a couple of chapters, it's not believable. And so far, Kirio hasn't regretted or hesitated to hurt Iruma or anyone else. He literally has to fight his desires to do so.

I read someone say that Kirio is a child manipulated by Baal, who took advantage of someone who has been rejected by his own family, even becoming their new "Big Brother". And while I agree that Baal influenced him, he didn't force him to be like that. He was already like that, and Baal gave him the opportunity to remain so. The netherworld that Baal desires is the same world that Kirio wants, because it is the world where he can be as degenerate as he wants. So I don't agree with the concept of "Kirio just needs a little love" (That's probably Shiida's concept).

So either the story starts seeding Kirio's redemption in more ways than "that's what Iruma wants" or it puts Iruma on the path of accepting that Kirio won't change and therefore doesn't deserve forgiveness.

Letting someone go is not that you lost them, it's that they lost you.

#mairuma #mairimashita! iruma kun #m!ik #iruma kun #welcome to demon school iruma kun #I love Iruma to no ends but I don't want to see the power of love resolving this problem #kirio is Iruma antagonist wanted or not #I love Iruma's good heart but what Kirio has to do for him to call him his enemy

[gsirvitor]

Hello, the 23 year old autistic anon, saw your post about halo

Now an author from the early days of halo that help make the Fall of Reach novel. Mention how Bungie didn’t even have a proper reasons why the Spartans exist they only made them because it “cool” so the writers made the human insurrections to explain why humanity had specialized soldiers prior to the covenant invasion.

I think the whole issue is that a lot of writers just write the plot of the stories only which caused issues.

Let me compare it to assassin creed, yes that series is a mess and got retcons, sorry ac help me cope after escaping my stepmom. It set up background lore especially in ac2 where we learn the assassins and Templars and their precursors been fighting each other since Genesis and we saw how they influenced events from the fall of the Egyptian empire (shown in origins) to world wars.

So while we are finally getting a ac game set in feudal Japan later this year. There was also side content that referenced how they influence Japan history

Sorry l trailing off, but I recall in the eu books there was a covenant credit and grunts consume mainly an artificial grub.

Perhaps because you and I are autistic so we think about those parts of lore more than the writers. I am amateur writer that makes nsfw stuff for a hero I like. But a mutual of mine says I flesh out certain aspects of the characters more than the comics as that company want comics only lead to big events rather than properly fleshing out stuff.

Sorry if this anon too long and I understand if you don’t respond, perhaps we can talk more about it more in DMs?

Halo is a series that runs off of the rule of cool, many things are given a hand wave in the logic department if they are cool in a way that the writers like.

For instance the levels involving the Flood, in Halo 2 where you play as the Arbiter, do not make sense, as the Flood can infect an individual through their spores, the Arbiter walks through these levels without a respirator and doesn't get infected, while other Sangheili wear clear and obvious respirators.

Now, this was done because the Arbiter looks cooler when his face is fully visible during cutscenes, it also keeps him visually distinct.

Now, the rule of cool isn't what I'm complaining about, the Spartan program, while originally an expression of this rule, was explained fully later in the novels and extended universe works.

What I'm complaining about are things writers should constantly consider when writing, that many professional works either refuse to consider or have never considered.

Yes, I know the extended novels of Halo mention currency, and what Grunts eat, they however only mention them in passing, and do not elaborate further, it's the same as the Eldar eating fruit and veggies, like sure, they eat that but how do they grow it, or how do they procure it/make it.

Yes, that is an issue, the plot, while important for writers to focus on, can only make sense if the setting is coherent and can logically work.

Sorry, I don't consider the AC games after Black Flag to be canon, as the retcons and abandoning of the original story made me not enjoy the series, however I understand what you are trying to say, even if I refuse to talk about Nu Assassins Creed.

Skipping the personal stuff.

[holdoncallfailed]

i was literally just about to leave to go to the grocery store (again) but that article got me thinking about the it chapter 2/goldfinch/stranger things mass hysteria event of autumn 2019 and why so many people—mostly bi/gay women—in their twenties (myself included of course) were so enamored with these stories. i know for me personally so much of my reliance on rehashing IT et al was due to being in my last semester of undergrad and realizing that the period of protracted semi-adolescence that i’d languished in during college was over, which meant that i no longer had any opportunity to achieve the platonic ideal of teenagehood that i felt i was owed by virtue of being alive. children don’t have much agency over the big decisions in their lives—that’s what all of those stories are about. but i think more broadly IT especially is about the ability to reclaim that agency on a very VERY literal level by physically revisiting the site of your childhood trauma and eliminating its source. same with stranger things. but it’s ultimately a shallow and frustrating way of interpreting one’s own life because it is so logically impossible to achieve such a thing in reality.

i felt like if i could see myself in these fictional teenagers and then read/write/watch/imagine their stories then that would somehow be analogous to remaking my own adolescence. i think identifying the gay subtext in all of those stories was especially important to me (and others) because it felt like i was reading between the lines of my own childhood confusion about my feelings for female friends and finally naming that. it relieved my guilt over being so ignorant to the “gay subtext” in my own life. at the same time, i also wanted to be a teenager again not only to correct the trajectory of my life but also paradoxically to relinquish the responsibilities of adulthood that were inescapable as i approached the end of my college career.

but you have to live your own life!!!!!!!!!! all that worked as a temporary vehicle for a huge number of complicated issues that i had neither the time nor energy to properly work through. i’m always going to be a person prone to sentimentality and nostalgia. but i think that if you find yourself always drawn to kids’ media, to thinking of yourself as relating exclusively to teenage characters and getting bored by stories about adults, you have to really look at why that is because those tendencies do not exist in a vacuum. you owe it to yourself to try to gain access to a wider array of media, yes, that will challenge you intellectually and creatively but also just to broader ways of thinking about yourself in the world, and the possibility of becoming satisfied with who you are right now and who you will be in the future instead of who you might have been had your childhood/adolescence been different.

#ok bye. #text

[ladyantiheroine]

With The Wolf Among us 2 is on it's way, which version of Bigby Wolf do you think is the better, the comic book version or the game version, and what characteristic do you find so appealing?

Hello! Thank you for the question! 

First of all, let me begin by saying that as of right now, I have not read all of the Fables comics (I’m somewhere a little past issue #50-ish) so this answer may be imperfect since I don’t have all the information from the series. 

Short Answer: I prefer video game Bigby by a long shot. He's more nuanced, better-written, and hotter than he is in the comics.

Long Answer:

Bigby in the comics doesn’t have the same internal struggles and complex relationships that he does in the game. Part of this is because Bigby is less of a protagonist in the comics, which have a broader scope and are more of an ensemble story. Again, I haven’t finished the whole series, so maybe I’m missing something, but he just feels more one-dimensional. Most of the characters in Fables don’t seem to change much and he’s no exception. He’s not a bad character, just not particularly noteworthy. I do like how he’s a bit of a pulp detective nerd at the beginning of the series, like when he explains the whole “parlor room scene” trope and we see pulp magazines next to his bed in one panel. But aside from that, he feels surface-level compared to the game.

He also makes a lot of…questionable decisions in the comics that I don’t like. Specifically, ones relating to Snow White. Certain things he says to her and certain things he does I just don’t like. I don’t mind characters being flawed and making bad decisions, because every story needs that. But even when Bigby acts like an asshole in the game, you understand where he’s coming from as the underappreciated force that’s keeping Fables from killing each other. I understand Bigby’s bad behavior more in the game than in the comics. In the comics, he acts like an asshole sometimes for no reason other than he’s the Big Bad Wolf and a tough action-hero guy. 

As for Bigby in the Telltale game, it’s tricky to talk about his characterization because it’s based on the choices that each player makes. Sure, he’s a gruff detective guy no matter how you play him. But depending on your choices, he can be merciful and cooperative or violent and vengeful. I have my own preferences for my choices (I would argue Bigby is more complex and interesting when he’s trying to be good) but both of those routes make sense for someone like him. His character journey, combined with the moral dilemmas the story presents, makes Bigby an interesting, layered character.

This all ties into the overarching, personal struggle that Bigby wrestles with in the game, enabled by Telltale’s player-choice template: He is torn between falling back into his violent habits as the Big Bad Wolf, or resisting them in favor of carving out this new path for himself. These two paths determine his character arc in a nuanced way, and both are logical outcomes for his character. The struggle between his affinity for violence and his desire to shed his past is a fascinating balancing act he has to maintain, which gives him a lot more depth and opportunity for character growth.

Also, in the game, Bigby suffers consequences in a way he doesn’t in the comics. When he acts out and gets violent, there are often repercussions. You can sympathize with him because he’s putting himself in danger to protect a community that does not appreciate him and still sees him as the Big Bad Wolf. But at the same time, you can also understand why the Fables wouldn’t trust Bigby, not just because of his past, but because he represents the Fabletown government that has failed them. It’s a complex situation that makes him far more interesting, compared to the comics where he just…stomps around and does stuff. 

He also feels these consequences more, with a mix of guilt, resentment, and maybe even self-loathing. Meanwhile, in the comics, he seems indifferent to how others perceive him, a certainty with himself that gives him less to personally wrestle with. The game’s consequences give weight to his actions and take a more personal toll on him. The game interrogates Bigby's "Big Bad Wolf" side in a way the comics have little interest in doing.

On top of all this, Bigby has more interesting relationships in the game. The game explores the internal tensions of the Fable community much more than the comics ever did: The way the Fabletown government has failed to protect its citizens, the way Fables who can’t “pass” for human are at a disadvantage, etc. We see this in his relationship with Toad and Colin, the regulars at the Trip Trap, etc. We see him butt-heads with those in power above him at the office, like Crane and even Snow at times. We see him reconcile with his past relationships in his interactions with the Woodsman. Bigby occupies an interesting liminal space between being Fabletown’s protector and being Fabletown’s feared outcast, and this creates a host of different dynamics with the other characters he interacts with.

Part of this could be a genre thing, as the comics are more of a superhero war story while the game is a detective noir mystery. This allows the game to get a closer, more intimate look at the characters and how the events are affecting them personally, which, in my opinion, lends to more interesting character writing. And of course, as many have already pointed out, I’m not a fan of how the Bigby/Snow romance plays out in the comics. The game does a way better job of fleshing out their relationship despite the fact the two don’t technically end up together. I think Telltale is just better at this kind of character writing than Bill Willingham is. The game is more interested in exploring the implications of Bigby’s character and his relationship with the world around him than the comics are. Not just Bigby, but all the characters, really.

I could go on for longer, but to summarize: Bigby is a more complex and interesting character than his comic book counterpart, who is mostly a one-note tough guy who is generic at best and unnecessarily cruel at worst. The game gives us reasons and motives for Bigby’s character, while the comics just expect us to roll with whatever he does. 

Telltale Bigby has nuance, motives, and growth in a way he just doesn’t in the comics.

Also, on a very shallow level, I find video game Bigby much more aesthetically pleasing (plus he’s voiced by Adam Harrington in the game, and that man’s voice is smoking hot).

I’m sorry this answer is super long, I love analysis and this game gives me a Lot Of Feelings.

#long post #sorry #I have many Thoughts and Feelings about this man #the wolf among us #twau #the wolf among us 2 #twau2 #bigby wolf #fables #fables comics #bill willingham #shut up elizabeth #rambles #telltale games #twau rambles

[transmasc-wizard]

i remember you saying that you did a lot of research for gfs, and lately i've been thinking of writing a more historical story so i was wondering if you had any tips for thoroughly researching a specific time period? literally anything will help, i'm horrible at research lol

i have a normal and logical level of love for research. I am not absolutely gleeful over this question to an amount far higher than normal. i am NOT--

yeah no i love this question

SO. I am going to answer the question that writers everywhere cry themselves to sleep over (probably) (maybe)

How The Fuck Do I Research Stuff For My Story? (Specific Time Period Edition)

1: know it's not just one thing.

you're not just "researching". That's a big, big umbrella that holds a LOT of things inside of it. You're researching clothing, politics, economic state, government, food, weapons, societal values at the time, and significant going-ons, among other things. It's better to break that into pieces than to try and tackle "research" as a whole.

Also: HAVE A RESEARCH DOCUMENT. Seriously. Write down anything that could be relevant. Also, have a table of contents or something similar and keep it organized. It helps, trust me.

2: Now, here's your pieces. Go in order.

1) ERA IN GENERAL.

So, you've told me (thanks to my frantic asks to you) that your story in particular is around the 1880s-1900s and takes place in the USA, Britain, France, and Japan. That means your story will exist in the gilded age (rich people! but also poverty), the very end of the Victorian era (she lived so fuckin long bro), the formative years (wooo France is full of communists) and the Meiji period (Japan gets to be powerful!).

No but really you picked a bunch of very.... interesting eras to collide all at once in your story skdjfskjfhk

In general, when it comes to researching the era, you want to look at the big picture of what was going on. You can first search "what era was [time period] for [country]", and then once you have the name of it, go wild: e.g. with the gilded age, you can go "advancements in the gilded age" "politics in the gilded age" "social issues in the gilded age" "the gilded age", and so on and so forth. Put the era's name in your search and you'll find results a lot quicker.

Era will include the economic state, political state, significant historical events before/after (aka events that have influenced your age or that are being influenced by your age), what the era is generally known for, advancements at the time, and relationships with the other countries your story is focusing on.

2) EVERYDAY THINGS AND/OR VERY IMPORTANT THINGS.

Food, fashion, common jobs, family structure, architecture & buildings, societal views, and other things that are addressed almost every day in some way. This is where you want to take the societal positions of your characters into your mind; a poor Jewish immigrant man and a high-class young white woman are going to have very different lives, even if they both live in NYC in the USA's Gilded Age. They'll eat different food, wear different clothes, be expected to have different skills, have different cultural beliefs/practices, have different jobs, and likely have very different political views.

So, when looking things up, think whether or not your characters would actually have that in their lives. There are people in ballgowns and people in rags, and you've got to figure out which one your character will be wearing.

Don't just research something like "1890s clothing". You want to find what is worn in that age by the types of people your characters are. So, "what did people wear in the victorian era" is a bad thing to google and expect precise results. "what did poor men wear in the victorian era" is a lot better.

Now's the time to do your research for some really big things, too. Say you have a scene that happens in a mansion in America, and it's a SUPER IMPORTANT SCENE. You're going to want to look up what American mansions in the Gilded Age often were like beforehand, even if none of your characters live in one or will have seen one beforehand.

3) MUCH MORE SPECIFIC THINGS.

Ok, so you know what a rich woman in the Meiji period would wear every day. Cool. But do you know what she should be wearing in that one scene with the super fancy event? Do you know what music would be playing? Do you know what weapon she could best have in that event?

It's ok if the answer is "no", even after your general research. Specific research is best saved for when you have to know it. Getting bogged down in research is a real thing, and it's very, very frustrating. So, either look those details up when you outline the scene (if you outline it) or when you actually need to write it. Like, say your characters end up in Paris in 1888 for a scene or two. Well, that's when the Eiffel Tower was built! You knew that already, because you looked up 1880s-1900s France and know quite a bit about it!

... what you don't know yet is what the construction site of the Eiffel Tower looked like. And that's fine--it's until it's time to actually focus on that scene.

3: Make Sure Your Sources Are Legit.

This can be hard, but in my experience, good sources will 1) list their sources and not try to hide them or just not have any, and 2) their information will agree with the info in other good sources. Basically, if 4 sources say XYZ and 1 says ABC, you can probably believe that ABC is wrong.

(Reading published books can help with this, though they're not always true, either. Basically: compare, compare, compare.)

4: Know This Takes Time.

It's ok to look at this and go "haha.... maybe I won't write anything historical". It's daunting! It can be a lot!

But it's all just pieces.

You read a couple articles and watch a video about clothing worn by Japanese peasants. You borrow a book that talks about food in the Gilded Age. You get lost down the rabbit hole of Victorian high-society politics. You write it all down in that trusty research doc.

And suddenly, you KNOW THINGS. You know things!! And videos that hinted at X but didn't quite talk about it lead you to researching X, which hints and Y and leads you to research Y, and so on and so forth.

It takes a long time, definitely. You'll be researching before you write, while you outline, and when you're writing. You'll research when you're editing and rewriting, too. But even if you don't particularly like it, you can find comfort in the fact that it just involves searching the right phrases and sitting down to watch some videos or read a library book. And in the end, you'll have a well-researched story--and that info doesn't go away! If you ever have to know something about the Victorian age, you'll be able to look back at what you learned awhile back. (Especially because you have your research doc, right?)

5: TLDR.

know research isn't just one clump, it's a lot of different things you look at

research the era, then general things, then things you need to know in specific situations only

use specific phrases, not just general things; "what jobs did men have in France in the 1880s" is lots better than "French jobs"

make sure your sources aren't just people lying on the internet for fun. comparing what your sources say and using a lot of them can help with this!

know it takes time, but don't stress. You don't have to get it done all at once.

have your motherfucking research doc. are you listening to me. WRITE DOWN THE INFORMATION THAT YOU FINDDDDDD

OK. This was a SUPER long post, but!! I really hope it's helpful!! If you have more questions, feel free to ask away :D

#researching #writblr #writeblr #nico yells writing advice into the void #long post #asks #luce! #i am. so sorry #i cant shut up </3

[cripplecharacters]

I'm pretty sure my ask got ate by tumblr so I'm submitting it again. I am planing on writing a supporting character who has low empathy. But I'm not sure how to integrate that into the plot and make it convincing. I don't want to accidentally feed into the harmful stigma surrounding ASPD and I'm worried I might on accident

Hi there, thanks for your question! It looks like Tumblr did in fact eat your first ask, so it's a good thing you sent it again :)

I don't have ASPD and we don't currently have any mods who do, but I'll speak to what I can as an Autistic person with selective low empathy.

Keep in mind that low empathy doesn't necessarily mean that a character can't be caring, kind and compassionate. While we can't choose to feel someone's pain if it doesn't come naturally to us, we can choose to acknowledge it, respect it and respond to it appropriately.

That said, you don't need to write a low empathy character who's overwhelmingly kind to people if that doesn't suit your character or story. I would just advise you not to make this character behave outright cruelly towards others, belittle others' pain, or be largely disliked by the rest of the cast for having low empathy, as this is the predominant negative stereotype about people with low empathy.

We tend to be really good at giving advice, especially in cases where someone wants to confide something and doesn't want others to make a big deal about it--in text, this could mean that other characters seek them out to provide more objective, actionable advice about their problems, trusting that your character won't be too emotionally clouded by others' feelings. Your character will also probably be able to stay calmer even when others are freaking out, and might be a more level-headed problem-solver. They're also less likely to "rise to the bait" if another character is upset and trying to rile them up or cause conflict, as they'll be less impacted by that character's emotional state. In fact, other characters might not even notice or realize that this character has low empathy, depending on their behaviour and approach to relationships, and might just think that they have very good emotional regulation and control.

As long as you remember that other characters' emotional states won't automatically transfer to your low empathy character by virtue of proximity or relationships, you should be fine. They might be more logic-driven than the rest of your cast when it comes to emotional issues, but that shouldn't necessarily be framed in a negative light on its own. It just means that your low empathy character might be more conscious of and intentional about how they respond to other characters, especially when those characters are in distress.

As always, this ask is open for input from others with low empathy, and especially people with ASPD!

-Mod Faelan

#low empathy #ASPD representation #mod faelan #satellite-slickers #personality disorders

[megasuperhappyfuntimestuff]

So, my growing position in terms of post-canon homestuck is disliking the epilogues and LOVING HSBC. I used to be an epilogues defender but I've been doing a reread and candy is so incredibly unfun. But I'm on meat now and...

Meat jadedavekat is kinda cute??????

Like. There IS a fundamental flaw in Jades approach. Her trying to logic it out and all that. But like... Dave and Karkats dynamic with her in that one is really cute and it seems like their fundamental issue with it is 1. The fact that they don't wanna communicate and 2. That they haven't reckoned with their feelings for each other yet.

Idk !! Meat still has got its issues, I mean the shit Dirk says about Jade are things people have said to me to justify why my polyamory is some sort of fucked up coping mechanism but rereading it has been really fun. Like I got so hyped for certain parts. Idk.

Not to sound like a broken record, but the main way both epilogues disappointed me so greatly is how it treated polyamory. And it had an actively negative effect on the fandom space regarding that. People were saying slutshaming, biphobic, and misogynistic things about Jade THAT PEOPLE HAD SAID TO ME IRL BEFORE. (Back when I id'd as pan). Like it seems like not only did a lot of people walk away from the epilogues feeling like there was a genuine "polyamory is just bad" message(like I did), a lot of people came away from it with "AND I AGREE, even though I don't even like this story". It was the first time I actually got harassed over fandom drama !! And I'm just a rando !!

Shrugs. I HIGHLY doubt hsbc is gonna end with meat jadedavekat. Tbh, I would WAY prefer if Jade asks about it and Dave and Karkat have matured to a level where they can just tell her that they don't want that. And Jade just gets to... Be her own person??? For a bit??? And kick more ass pls. God the hsbc chapter where she beats up ult!Callie is so good.

ALSO MAKE CANDY JADEROSEMARY GOOD SOMEHOW???? CONVINCE ME HSBC!!!!! I'm very willing to be convinced bc I do love that ship outside the context of how they did it. Show them grow and show them care for each other. Make it up to Kanaya. Instill trust into their relationship. Let them make boundaries. Idk. Help them heal.

(I may be biased because I literally adore Yiffy as a character like. Such a cool design such a cool deal)

Idk. I genuinely feel like homestuck kind of has to redeem itself big time with polyamorous fans and I don't know if the team knows that.

Anyway I literally adore this team so I will proooobably like what they do no matter what, even if they take the characters in directions that I wouldn't. I'm here for the ride and to support cool queer art. Worst that happens? There's an aspect I don't like of it and I write my own damn homestuck >u<

#hsbc #This is such old news where did this come from Hope????? #my favorite hobby is beating dead horses #long ass post

[paragonrobits]

Would Princess Bubblegum and Marceline ever have children?

If you go strictly by canon they both give the impression that its not necessarily something they would definitely care for, but it's still an open avenue to explore in fic works, AUs and story concepts; as far as canon goes, we haven't seen any trace of beings in episodes set in the future that would suggest beings that can claim descent from PB and Marceline, like gum beings with demonic traits. It COULD be possible that there's plenty of them we just haven't seen yet, or might have left for outer space by that point (and its possible that's where PB and Marceline actually are, as its a nice continuation of Marceline's desire for company that she won't be afraid of abandoning her, and PB's desire for a stable state that doesn't need her constant micromanagement).

The most obvious question is a biological concern; can either of them have kids? The answer to that is that PB probably can't, at least in her normal state, while Marceline probably can. There's nothing to suggest she can't, to my knowledge. For Bubblegum, though, she doesn't reproduce as humans or similar creatures would, at least without modification to her body. She can most certainly do so, but the big question is why she might see a need to do so when creating life to her specifications is easier, more efficient and somewhat more predictable in her experience.

On a biological level, PB is for the most part pretty unique; she budded off an entity known as the Mother Gum, a large hive of mutated gum that has, to my knowledge, only produced PB herself and her brother Neddy, who is a dragon-like creature. (While she has a family, Bubblegum specifically made them herself to have a family.) It's never been shown if PB can bud off other gum beings. I wouldn't rule it out entirely, but it does beg the question if she would WANT to, or how to make that happen. The Mother Gum itself is... I think it was seperated and went skyward, though the information I've seen about it isn't too clear about whether it died or not. It might be a moot issue if PB can bud like that, though, since it took her a couple hundred years to be born after she gestated, and is probably outside the scope of what she would prefer.

Marceline is a more likely bet to reproduce in a conventional sense; she is biologically human (half-demon, at that) and while I don't recall if its ever been stated if vampires are incapable of producing young in AT, it might just be something that's never come up, and most of the vampires we DO see look quite similar to each other, which suggests either a form of reproduction or post-vampirizing they mutate into similar forms. It simply hasn't come up in canon, though I would say that wanting to be a mother would probably be a logical step in her character development as she feels comfortable enough in her life and stability for the future to want to be so, especially after coming to terms with her mothers love for her and bringing Simon back into her life.

(I would assume she would go out of her way to not speak with Hunson about him having grandkids at all by this point. You fucked up buddy and Simon is her dad now.)

So the most likely avenues for them to have kids would be adoption (there's certainly no lacking of kids across Ooo, though Marcy and PB might be weird or scary by their standards), artificially creating them (which might be the solution PB prefers, as well as properly hybridizing them... then again we got a whole species of hybrids from Jake and Lady Rainicorn so its probably not hard to do without super duper science), or conventional pregnancy with a bit of tweaking to make it work if need be.

One final thought, that can be applied in either a platonic or romantic angle depending on how you want to view it; them asking Finn to contribute to this, by either fathering their children (either for Marceline in particular or both girls in some manner) or contributing his genetic material to whatever procedure they favor. This works especially well if you interpret their broader dynamic as familial in nature, by taking that idea to its logical extreme.

You can further interpret it as them wanting to have some aspect of him intact in the inevitable event of his death. PB and Marceline are, if not immortal, EXTREMELY long lived and given how close they are to Finn and how much their lives are all intertwined, its easy to see them being increasingly more distressed by his inevitable death while they'll just keep going on; should he leave them children and other descendants, that can be something quantifiable that makes it easier for him to accept his fate.

Whether this specific turn of events would be romantic or not would depend entirely on how you handle it. Personally I love the idea of either making it shippy or handling it so that it's weird and hard to quantify and slot into a specific box, which is in synch with Finn, PB and Marceline's complex relationships with each other in general.

(I might also suggest that their actual offspring, using any or all of these above ideas, aren't necessarily something as simple as human/demon/gum mashups. Imagine Shermy being a distant descendant of them as a possibiltiy for 'wow that's weird, how did your genes do THAT?'. Ooo is a weird place.)

#adventure time #replies #ideas #fic ideas #queued #i would love to do some writing for that final concept #maybe i could do a story focusing around that?? #food for thought anyways!

[hyba]

WHO IS INVIDIA?

I put my detective cap on today, and made a cork board sketch to determine who Invidia is. Strings, connecting dots, the whole deal.

For those who aren't familiar with this character, "Invidia" is the code name that Cassia's blackmailer went by. This person knew about Cassia's past and her true relationship to Aster Lockwood. They were using this information to get payments from her each month. A few months before her murder, Cassia had stopped paying Invidia and refused to continue doing so. Naturally, Laith suspects that this Invidia person might have been Cassia's killer.

In the current draft, Invidia is revealed to be...

(SPOILER ALERT? It changes so it doesn't matter but if you're reading the current draft and haven't gotten to it yet, read ahead at your own peril.)

...Audra Haize.

In a nutshell, here's the case against Haize:

She works at PATET HQ, she is able to hack her way into parts of the PATET system she isn't supposed to have access to or clearance for, and she has more money than an Assistant Spec should have. She also worked under Grot Antrum, who was connected to Cassia's past, so she could have maybe learned about the whole thing from him, directly or by snooping. She's a good snooper.

Moreover, she would have had the knowhow and opportunity to remove all traces of any footage which featured Cassia Grove meeting up with Invidia at Platano Maduro.

On the surface, she looks like the kind of person who would be able to pull all of this off. In the current story, we learn that she was doing it for two reasons:

She was blackmailing Grot Antrum to keep him in check and ensure her career progression.

She wanted to get a little extra money; apparently, there are rumours within PATET HQ that Specs have crossed lines for bribes before.

Why this doesn't hold up:

Audra has been cooperating and aiding in the investigation into Cassia's murder from the moment we meet her.

If she was Invidia, she would want to stay as far away from Laith as possible. To make herself invisible. Just another Assistant Spec. There is one compelling reason for this:

In the current draft, Haize claims that she had no clue about the murder that Grot, Cassia, and her husband were covering up. Given that she had become a part of that crime, there is a very big chance she would be arrested and sentenced heavily for her involvement in the continued cover up of a murder.

The punishment for murder in Heliopolis is the death penalty.

Covering up the crime is almost akin to being a part of it, which means that Haize was, in the worst case, facing the hangman's noose if her involvement was revealed.

Why does she help Laith if she truly is Invidia? She could be risking her life. There is nothing tying her to this case, apart from Aster Lockwood, and if we're being honest, he's not credible. Logically, if she is Invidia, the best thing for Audra to do is lay low.

The other issue is the money and job progression thing:

Specialists are very well respected in Heliopolis, and even Assistant Specialists are paid handsomely for their work, despite the job's entry level status. So she's pretty solid on that front, too. She doesn't need to blackmail anyone.

And, if she's as good at her job as the book makes her out to be, why would Antrum keep her career from progressing? He wouldn't; and he couldn't, because each team of Assistant Specialists reports to two Specialists which act as co-leaders and trainers. It's not up to Grot alone.

It just doesn't make sense for Audra to be Invidia the way I've set up her character and the worldbuilding.

So, who is Invidia? 🧐

After carefully assessing motives, means, and opportunities for each potential Invidia suspect - including new characters I've added like Moorland and Wulf - I narrowed it down to four main questions:

Did they know/could they have had the opportunity to learn about Aster Lockwood and Cassia Grove?

Would they not actually go through with their threat if Cassia and her husband refused to pay? (This is a necessary point because Invidia didn't do anything after Cassia and her husband stopped paying up. After all, Invidia is meant to be a false red herring - not related to Cassia's murder but related to the huge iceberg of which her murder is only the tip.)

Did they need the money enough to do something like this, right under PATET's nose, where the smallest slip-up could cost them everything?

Did they have access to PATET and could they potentially manipulate it to protect themselves?

Only one suspect fit all four criteria, and it wasn't Audra Haize, mainly because she didn't need the money enough to potentially put her neck on the line.

Also, the one person who did fit all four criteria had an even stronger motive, means, and opportunity than she would have, and a history of criminal activity.

I wonder if you can guess who it is? 😉

#solarpunk #writeblr #writing #murder mystery #bookblr #murder in heliopolis #hyba is writing

[h-worksrambles]

Xenoblade 3′s Direct was amazing, I think I’m gonna cry oh my god-

(takes a deep breath)...So there was a 20 minute long Direct for Xenoblade Chronicles 3, and, shockers, I kinda loved it to death.

A lot of this direct was giving more clarity on stuff that mostly confined to vague tweets on Monolith’s Japanese Twitter. So on a gameplay level, it really is like someone took all the coolest parts of 1, X and 2 and mushed them into a single game. I remember seeing some discourse on Twitter back when they confirmed that some arts would recharge based on either time (like in 1 and X) or attacking (like in 2). Mostly people complaining it would have been better to stick uniformally to one or the other (usually based on which game they liked more). But given the amount of playstyles the new class system allows for, I think mixing the two should work perfectly. Characters with slow attacks or who have to move around a lot rather than stay still to attack will benefit from timed cooldown. Meanwhile, characters with quick attacks will be able to pull off the kind of arts spam that 2 allowed for. Best of both worlds. And this Fusion Art mechanic looks like it has a ton of stratgeic potential. It was also nice to get definitive proof that yes, it wasn’t just a mistranslation; you can indeed swap control of party members on the fly. That seemed like the logical next step for the series after Torna and will help greatly with the previous game’s issues with dodgy ai. Everything about battling in this game looks excellent.

And the Ouroboros fusion technique quite literally just got twice as interesting.  It looks to be fillling the same role Overdrive did in X as a timed power up. But letting them form change based on who takes the lead effectively doubles the potential this already looked to have, as we now have 6 giant mech fusions rather than 3. When you factor in that you can seemingly weave in and out of them in chain attacks, that just opens up the strategy even more. Speaking of, chain attacks also look great. I like how you seem to be able to choose which party member follows up with your next move. Plus, I'm glad that you can chain arts for more than just raw damage. I loved that aspect of 1 but didn’t like how RNG based chain links were. 2 gave you much more control but also restricted chain attacks to damage only. This version seems to have you chain arts to work up to a big flashy special which is, say it with me, the best of both worlds.

And as much as I was interested in what we already knew about the Heroes thanks to their variety of cool designs (I particularly enjoyed the new reveals of Ashera and Gray), the fact that you can use their classes makes me much more invested as they're more than just bonus party members now. Now we're looking at a class system with a much more robust number of jobs, so I can only imagine how much strategy that will allow for. X’s class system was already great, but the fact that you have this much flexibility with every party member has some fantastic potential. Plus, between camping dialogues, crafting, a full affinity chart, this looks to bring back so many different mechanics from the games, all while full of gorgeous vistas that echo the locations of the last two entries while still being beautiful in their own right. This game looks to be an absolute blast to play and I couldn’t be more excited.

Now, on to the story. This isn’t a scene by scene breakdown, more of a general thoughts thing. The story section seemed to expand on a lot of stuff that website descriptons were hinting at. Specifically the whole 'people live for 10 years' thing. The first trailer hinted at some kind of lives as fuel thing, but now we know that people literally kill other people to get more time, which sounds like a fascinatingly grim concept. Plus, it was pointed out to me by a friend that it really resembles the plot of the sci fi movie Logan’s Run. This wouldn’t be the first time Takahashi pulled a Kojima and laid on the movie references very thick, but is interesting to see all the same.

I also think I like this new cast more and more every time I see them. Their designs are all slick as hell, voice acting seems fitting all round, and all the interactions in the trailer just seem so charming. Lanz is my favourite so far because I’m gay and predictable, plus it’s just cool to see the Machina return in such a big way. Though I also enjoyed this trailer’s insight into Taion’s more introspective side. Looks like a lot of the game's emotional angst will revolve around Mio given her dwindling lifespan.  But I think we still have a lot to learn about our main character. Drip notwithstanding, Noah still seems like something of a question mark who I don’t have much of a read on, yet. So I'm really keen to see where this all goes. While I won’t go into specifics to avoid spoiling the other games, I was interested to see how this game is revisiting themes and concepts of both the Xenoblade series and the Xeno series in general. Themes of othering vs unity, and the value of other peoples lives, which I’ve already talked about previously. Themes of mortality as explored by ‘Seven’ in 1 and the Aegis in 2 (albeit in very different ways). And of course, the phrase ‘the passsage of fate’ which was so integral to the first game, has come up several times, already. We also got more of a glimpse at our apparent villains. I could point out how much their cryptic back and forth remind me of the Gazel Ministry from Xenogears. But I was mostly struck by how much their dialogue talked about the idea of fate. That’s hardly a new concept for a series where multiple characters can see the future, but given that power has always been tied to the Monado in some way, it raises a lot of questions about our new baddies, if it is they, and not our main characters, who have insight into the future. Also, their old timey cinema is cool as hell.

Put simply, this game continues to look better and better every time we see it, and I think it’s fully in the running for my game of the year. Yes, even with how good Elden Ring is. July 29th cannot get here soon enough.

#xenoblade chronicles #xenoblade 3 #xenoblade direct #noah xenoblade #mio xenoblade #trailer thoughts #also it goes without saying that the music is gorgeous so far