cle-guy

[cle-guy]

Just upping this because every now and again I like to re-read it, and it's getting harder to find

Do you believe the United States, and the future Soviet Union, would still have collided in a 'Cold War' had the Triple Alliance beaten the Entente during World War 1?

That’s a difficult question because how WWI ends shapes Europe to include the Russian Revolution and the formation of the Soviet Union. But I get to worldbuild our actual world now, which I enjoy as much as worldbuilding pure fantasy worlds.

If, for example, the Schlieffen-von Moltke plan worked, and Germany crushed Belgium and France in the timetable that the German High Command was expecting, it’s entirely possible that Germany forces a ceasefire in 1914-1915, and depending on the terms, Russia might not be weakened enough to permit the Revolution, and Lenin might still be sitting in Zurich or Bern instead of ever going to Russia (and his radical politics would quickly run him into hot water in a victorious Kaiserreich). Autocracy would be heralded as the triumphant European answer, having beaten the French Republic not once but twice in this mechanized age, and you might see a movement in Europe toward more authoritarian styles of regimes, Tsarist Russia already being one of the most autocratic regimes of the 20th century. von Moltke would be heralded as a military genius for his flawless execution of winning a two-front war, Central Europe would be a far more dominant player on the world stage, and France, Great Britain, and the United States might be seen as antiquated traditionalists who refused to adapt their governments in the face of growing mechanization mandating a one-party dictatorship to ensure mobilization is at its most rapid.

Conversely, if the United States stays out and Ludendorff wins WWI with his Kaiserschlact, then while much of that stays the same, you would see growing antagonism between the victorious German Empire and the Soviet Union (Ludendorff despised socialism) and you would have had the Western powers picking which of the two they wanted to support for the next great conflict. Ireland would have probably become a full socialist state rather than the Irish Republic, and other new countries that were birthed in the breakup of WWI might adopt socialism as well. Would the United States continue to support Great Britain and France or would they look to sell to the winning team? I’m not even going to touch the Middle East since it would look completely, well, alien to our modern understanding. Maybe the United Arab nation actually materializes, maybe it collapses under the strain of factionalism and arguments over who is in charge. We’re in completely new territory.

If the United States enters and the Germans win anyway, then the US would probably be extraordinarily isolationist (at least until technology forces globalization), since interventionism hurt them so significantly.

Then, you have to wonder whether the Soviet Union in this new world sticks with Stalin as the successor to Lenin, or if Trotsky manages to become the leader and he follows his “Revolution in All Countries” mantra and export dissidents and communists to other nations, in which case you would certainly still have conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States, but the shape of it would be very different.

After all, the Cold War was very much a competition of models of government (as Nixon’s Kitchen Debates shows), and the loss of the autocratic powers (to include Russia) in World War I and World War II went a long way to discrediting fascism and dictatorship in the early 20th century in the West. So instead you might see a Cold War between democracies on one side, socialism on another side, and autocracy on the third for a sort of feeling that honestly resembles Europe pre-World War I to a frightening degree.

Either way, that world would be very different.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy. It’s always fun to build new 20th centuries.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

@lotrweek 2024 — day 7: free day ↳ happy hobbit day!

[cle-guy]

• A new mechanic which is a tweak on a mechanic from 2013:

This could be Evolve, Cipher, Battalion, Bloodrush, Extort, Fuse, Scry, Monstrosity, Heroic, Bestow, or Devotion

Monstrosity (Adapt), Battalion (Coven) & Scry (Surveil) have both been done before. Bloodrush feels too much like Channel to me, and I think it's not the option. Cipher's design space is too small, and Evolve doesn't feel like the right fit (nor does Extort). Fuse is not enough to get excited about, and I think Bestow is too complex and is an enchantment mechanic making it a better fit for Duskmorn. That leaves Heroic and Devotion, I'll guess Heroic.

• “Destroy target creature” (a spell with only this rules text) gets a new mana cost

Hmm, one mana cost with an additional cost?

• A cycle of uncommon lands that each reference four creature types

We've already seen these

• Counters in the set: +1/+1, blight, coin, finality, flood, flying, indestructible, loyalty, stash, stun, and supply

We've seen almost all of these before, not too much to see. Stash counters are interesting

• A noncreature subtype makes its first return

Hmmm, this could be: Cartouche, Case, Class, Lair, Rune, Siege (UNLESS it's a PLANESWALKER subtype but I will assume Mark isn't playing tricks). Cartouche does not fit, Case I suppose could but I'm skeptical. I'll guess Lair

• A ten-card cycle that acts as typal glue

Changelings IMO

• Two mechanics that came out in the same set return each part of a different two-color archetype

This one is tough, will have to think on it too many options

Not too much to say on the others

Maro’s Bloomburrow Teaser

Before previews for Bloomburrow officially begin, I thought it would be fun to do another of my Duelist-style teasers where I give tiny hints of things to come. Note that I’m only giving you partial information.  

First up, here are some things you can expect:  

• A new mechanic which is a tweak on a mechanic from 2013

• “Destroy target creature” (a spell with only this rules text) gets a new mana cost

• A cycle of uncommon lands that each reference four creature types

• Counters in the set: +1/+1, blight, coin, finality, flood, flying, indestructible, loyalty, stash, stun, and supply

• A noncreature subtype makes its first return

• A ten-card cycle that acts as typal glue

• Two mechanics that came out in the same set return each part of a different two-color archetype

• The word “Squirrels” shows up four times in rules text

• A mythic cycle with a new symbol

• One of the cutest mechanics we’ve ever made

Next, here are some rules text that will be showing up on cards:  

• “Create X tokens that are copies of target token you control.”

• “If you control a Raccoon, you may discard a card.”

• “Creatures your opponents control have base toughness 1.”

• “Whenever one or more other creatures you control leave the battlefield without dying,”

• “if it’s the first instant spell, the first sorcery spell, or the first Otter spell”

• “put a flood counter on target land.”

• “where X is the number of creatures you opponents controlled that were exiled this turn.”

• “for each other Squirrel and/or Food you control.”

• “As long as there are four or more card types among cards exiled with CARDNAME,”

• “up to one target artifact, creature, or planeswalker an opponent controls loses all abilities until your next turn.”

Here are some creature type lines from the set: 

• Creature – Hamster Citizen

• Creature – Frog Advisor

• Creature – Skunk Assassin

• Creature – Raccoon Berserker

• Creature – Squirrel Warlock Bard

• Creature – Rabbit Mouse

• Legendary Creature – Badger Warrior

• Legendary Creature – Weasel Mercenary

• Legendary Creature – Elemental Elk

• Legendary Creature – Bird Dragon

Finally, here are some names in the set: 

• Crumb and Get It

• Festivals of Embers

• Hop to It

• Kitnap

• Playful Shove

• Polliwallop

• Rabid Gnaw

• Shrike Force

• War Squeak

• Wishing Well

Tune-in to our official YouTube and Twitch channels (youtube.com/@mtg antwitch.tv/Magic and) at 9:00 am PT on Tuesday, July 9 as Bloomburrow previews begin.

[cle-guy]

[cle-guy]

Shocked

I feel awful, rest in peace Steven

I don’t have a lot of words right now but Steven Attewell, who you all reading this probably know as @racefortheironthrone , just passed away. He was a very great writer, friend, and person, and it’s a horrible loss.

[cle-guy]

First off: how many Ravnicans are going to actually know that "War of the Spark" was about planeswalkers?

Second off: planeswalkers were ALSO on the side of SAVING the city during "War of the Spark" including the two crucial ones who won the dang thing (and one of them died in the attempt), so this is not as clear cut in my mind at all.

Third off: I do not buy for one second that "all of those planeswalkers owe their lives to the citizens of Ravnica!" since those planeswalkers were pretty crucial to their victory. War of the Spark is a Bolas win without Jace, Teferi, Ajani, Kaya...the list is long, all fighting their tails off to save the city. They are equally responsible.

With all of this being said: I could buy Ravnicans hating planeswalkers post War. But this is after March of the Machine.

For me the better case for Ravnicans to hate anyone or anything its the Guilds. It was the guilds who all clammed up during War of the Spark and chose not to fight (well, besides the Boros). It's the guilds who collapsed and generally failed in MOM to lead the defense of the city (especially the Izzet and Simic who were enamored with glistening oil).

This whole thing feels contrived

Hi Jay,

The recent story seems to heavily imply that the Ravnican population as a whole are pissed off with *all* planeswalkers for not coming to their aid during the Phyrexian Invasion. Are they all being entitled ass-hats (what with the number of planeswalkers << numberof planes being invaded), or am I missing something here?

Imagine you are an average Ravnican.

Imagine if the most important position in your government was taken by a being from outside of your world, and they disappeared for long stretches off-world. You've never heard of a planeswalker before.

Imagine if within the span of a few months, half your other heads of state were replaced by planeswalkers just like him, most of which because of assassinations... carried out by these same planeswalkers. Most at the behest of ANOTHER planeswalker, a massive evil dragon who launches an invasion with off-world murder zombies and wreaks havoc on your world. You finally know the name planeswalker, and associate it with the worst tragedy to happen on your plane in millennia.

All to get at these planeswalkers. And at the cost of thousands of lives - YOUR lives, YOUR people, the ones that the dragon AREN'T after, they win. Every single one of those planeswalkers owes their lives to the citizens of Ravnica. Every. Single. One. Dozens of planeswalkers, deep in Ravnica's debt.

Two years later, one of those planeswalkers, a supposed local, launches yet another invasion. Worse than the last. And where were these planeswalkers YOU saved in THEIR hour of need, now that YOU need them?

Not a single one of the dozens whose lives were bought with the blood, sweat, and tears of average Ravnicans could be bothered to show up. Even the Orzhov Guildmaster couldn't even be bothered to show up. The only one that did was the Izzet Guildmaster.

Azor's beard. These ungrateful assholes. Planeswalkers suck. We hate them.

[cle-guy]

-My guess is that White can cast a sub-type off the top of the deck, maybe detectives? That would fit the theme of the set OR it allows them to cast Cases

-Case is intriguing, my guess is its a subtype which sacrifices itself when it's 'solved' for an effect

-The four different hybrids will be their new take on four color creatures, maybe a cycle like the nephilim

-My guess on the popular returning mechanic, tweaked, is Detain. It fits the theme of the set and has a fair amount of design space. My guess is it incorporates stun counters in some way

-Green sorcery will be like Muscle Burst from Odyssey

-My guess is Conspire on the returning card as it fits the set flavorfully

-Ooooh, maybe a creature that lets you sacrifice other creatures to cast spells?

On the creature types:

The two that intrigue me are Lammasu and Mole God. I do not recall a 'Mole God' being anywhere in Ravnica, so that's intriguing

Looking forward to this

Maro’s Teaser for Murders at Karlov Manor

Before previews for Murders at Karlov Manor officially begin, I thought it would be fun to do another of my Duelist-style teasers where I give tiny hints of things to come. Note that I’m only giving you partial information.  

First up, here are some things you can expect:  

• white gets a card that lets you play a subset off the top of the deck

• a new enchantment subtype Case

• a card with four different hybrid symbols in its mana cost

• a popular mechanic returns tweaked with a new name

• a green sorcery that you can have any number of in your deck

• a keyword mechanic not printed in a premier set since 2008 returns on a single card

• a creature that allows you an alternate nonmana cost for all your spells

• some creature tokens in the set: (note that some have abilities) 0/0 green Ooze, 0/0 colorless Thopter (also artifact), 0/1 green Plant, 1/1 black Bat, 1/1 white Dog, 1/1 red Goblin, 1/1 white Human, 1/1 blue Merfolk, 1/1 white and black Spirit, 1/1 colorless Thopter (also artifact), 2/1 black Skeleton, 2/1 black and green Spider, 2/2 white and blue Detective, 2/2 red Imp, and 5/5 green and white Wolf

• And yes, Murder is in the set

Next, here are some rules text that will be showing up on cards:  

• “Whenever a creature an opponent controls dies, if its toughness was less than 1, draw a card.”

• “Choose any number of target players.”

• “Creature cards in your graveyard gain ‘You may cast this card from your graveyard’ until end of turn.”

• “Then sacrifice it if it has five or more bloodstain counters on it.”

• “you may search your graveyard, hand, and/or library for a card named Magnifying Glass and/or a card named Thinking Cap and put them onto the battlefield.”

• “target opponent gains control of any number of target permanents you control.”

• “If an ability of a creature you control with power 2 or less triggers, that ability triggers an additional time.”

• “As long as there are no cards in your library,”

• “If one or more tokens would be created under your control, those tokens plus a Clue token are created instead.”

• “Whenever you sacrifice a Clue, target opponent gets two poison counters.”

Here are some creature type lines from the set: 

• Creature – Vedalken Artificer Detective

• Creature – Ogre Cleric

• Artifact Creature – Insect Thopter

• Creature – Lammasu

• Creature – Weird Detective

• Creature – Goblin Bard

• Creature – Viashino Assassin

• Artifact Creature – Clue Fish

• Creature – Elf Crocodile Detective

• Legendary Creature – Mole God

Finally, here are some names in the set: 

• Airtight Alibi

• Caught Red-Handed

• Deadly Cover-Up

• Eliminate the Impossible

• Homicide Investigator

• Innocent Bystander

• It Doesn’t Add Up

• Person of Interest

• Private Eye

• Scene of the Crime

Follow the story each day this week and tune into the debut at 9:00 am PT on Jan 16 on twitch.tv/magic or youtube.com/@mtg to learn whodunit! Can you solve the mystery before detective extraordinaire Alquist Proft?

[cle-guy]

Dack was a mistake which in hindsight was totally avoidable

There just haven’t been that many deaths though. The survivors stand out more

Do you think any of the deaths in the story were a mistake?

Dack Fayden.

I will never forgive.

“Mistake” is the wrong word here though, because planeswalker deaths happen for more reasons than just narrative choices by an author, right? Design space, popularity, etc etc all affect it.

I think my only regrets (not that I make any of the calls, to be clear) is killing off characters before they’ve had a good amount of narrative, but that itself was a challenge in a multiverse with 40+ Planeswalkers where we can only feature a handful at a time.

[cle-guy]

My guesses:

Beijing (China)

Cairo (Egypt)

Dublin (Ireland)

Edinburgh (Scotland)

Frankfurt (Germany)

Geneva (Switzerland)

Hanoi (Vietnam)

Istanbul (Turkey)

Jakarta (Indonesia)

Kyiv (Ukraine)

London (England)

Mumbai (India)

New York (America)

Oslo (Norway)

Paris (France)

Rome (Italy)

Sydney (Australia)

Tokyo (Japan)

Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia, and it’s the capital)

Vancouver (Canada)

Warsaw (Poland)

Zurich (Switzerland)

Couldn’t think of any city that started with Q, X, or Y that fit

When will we know the other cities of the world code names?

When the enter exploratory design.

[cle-guy]

Had they done this they could have avoided the silliness of omen paths

Do you think it would ever be an issue to print a still-sparked Planeswalker as a legendary creature? They are still, fundamentally, just people, and thus could just as easily be represented by creatures.

We thus far have chosen not to do that, but it has been discussed.

[cle-guy]

One additional comment on this old analysis, one of Lucas’s themes in the prequel trilogy is how the Jedi were simply not the good guys like Kenobi remembered. This isn’t to say that the Republic and the Jedi are the same as the Empire and the Sith, or that they are merely the lesser evil. Instead the argument in my mind is that stasis and stagnancy is it’s own thing evil and without regrowth and challenge we can lock ourselves in a severely limited status quo.

One thing I dislike about Lucas is his inherent pessimism he rarely attempts to explain WHY the Jedi became arrogant and snobby, or how the Republic fell into disrepair, he simply suggests that decay is a natural progression. Which is why I find his argument far less ideological than it is simply about human nature.

KOTOR makes the same mistake with the Republic, but it at least explores the Jedi. Unlike the prequels, the Jedi are shown to be complacent and ascetic to a fault. The Jedi refuse to involve themselves against clear evils and, as a result, the Mandalorians almost destroy the Republic. Their arrogance directly leads Revan to rush headlong into a war without guidance and as a result he becomes a Sith. The Jedi only join the fight in earnest when Revan declares war against the Jedi themselves showing the Jedi to be self interested as well as complacent.

One additional detail I like is that the three Sith are mirrored by three Jedi. Sion, Traya and Nihilus have three Jedi mirrors. First is Zez-Kai-El who was a failed mentor, and a man who agreed with Revan but lacked the conviction to join him. Next is Vrook Lamar who is the conservative, arrogant, ascetic. He is the man who’s policies resulted in the Jedi abandoning the Republic, he didn’t want to use Revan and then he didn’t want to work with the Exile. He is a case where he cared more about being right and about being in control of a small Jedi Order than doing the right thing. Finally you get Kavar who is an institutionslist who thinks he’s a renegade. He fought in the Mandalorian Wars, agreed that the Exile was on to something, but went along with Vrook anyway.

In short, KOTOR II exposes the rot within the Jedi and shows why that, even if the Jedi are better intentioned than the Sith and obviously decent people: they weren’t capable of changing the structures of the galaxy which held everyone back. But importantly, it also shows that building back the previous order isn’t enough. This is some thing the sequel trilogy completely misses outside the Last Jedi. But that’s another story.

What is your opinion of KOTOR 2? Favorite things about it, least favorite things about it, characters, etc.

Alright, it’s time for another video game review, so an early reminder, spoilers abound for both KOTOR1 and KOTOR2. There’s a cut of course. Overall, I thought it was a phenomenally well-written game and one of the greatest pieces of media to exist in the Stars Wars universe (although I haven’t read any of the Expanded Universe books so keep that in mind), and as is the usual case for Obsidian particularly in this era, developer constraints created a beautiful mess.

Before we can talk about KOTOR we need to talk a little bit about Star Wars and what it meant as a film. The original Star Wars isn’t a very creative story, it’s largely a conventional Hero’s Journey. It’s a pastiche of early adventure stories in a science fiction setting, but with the added benefit of video and sound effects to really make it come to life in a way that was only possible in the imagination of readers. This gave the series a wide deal of appeal. Folks who grew up on the 1950′s Flash Gordon serials or WW2 dogfight films could see a film with those things they loved from their childhood with a high budget to bring those things to life. Science fiction fans could visually see elements of their favorite books brought to life on the silver screen. Fans of movies can appreciate the cutting-edge (for the time, although I love me some practical effects in film) effects and the unfamiliar elements of science fiction with the familiar trappings of an adventure tale. 

KOTOR was something similar for the video game industry, particularly for the fans of Baldur’s Gate. The ability to create a Jedi character and go on a journey like the Bhaalspawn did in Baldur’s Gate was something that appealed to a significant number of RPG fans, and the critical success of the Baldur’s Gate series brought a lot of money and prestige to Bioware. Fans of RPGs and Star Wars got to see their medium and interact with it in a whole new light. Much like A New Hope, KOTOR1 was largely a traditional story where Darth Malak is an evil guy without much in the way of redemptive qualities. The two major wrinkles were that you could play as a Sith and have some moments of true player cruelty like ordering Zaalbar to kill Mission, but this makes sense for an RPG, having no player choice in a game really makes you lose the lightside/darkside dynamic. Of course, the bigger and more interesting drift from a traditional Star Wars story was the Revan twist. This took advantage of both the slower pace of games to spend time with your PC and form a connection, and the nature of Western RPG’s where the player envisions themselves partially as their avatar onscreen to make the reveal hit home. Ultimately though, the Star Wars morality was upheld. The Jedi were the unequivocal good guys, the Sith were the unequivocal bad guys. 

KOTOR2 decided to put the Force under the microscope. It had started in 2003, so Episode II had already come out, and this idea of the prophecy of Anakin bringing balance to the Force, and what we knew of the Jedi in the original Star Wars trilogy who were reduced to hermits hiding on the fringes of society, really gave the impetus to examine this idea of the balance of the Force as not necessarily benevolent. It’s not evil, per say, it’s just indifferent to the people that die to make it happen. So the game became a self-critical examination of the core structures of the Star Wars universe. The Sith are usually thought of as the bad guys, and a lot of that holds true, domination, subjugation, power, betrayal, all that nasty stuff aren’t really conducive to most conceptions of goodness, but are the Jedi good? Does their passivity lead to injustice and terror being wrought on others because the Jedi failed to act. That was the question behind the Jedi involvement in the Mandalorian Wars, was the Exile correct in going off to fight them or were the Jedi Council who forbade them correct? As befits the folks who wrote Planescape: Torment, the game has two journeys, one through the game world and the plot that unfolds and another more deeply introspective.

I’ll put the things I don’t like about KOTOR2 first because the list is small but it is worth noting. The game is very clearly a rushed product and it shows. The cut content shows a great deal of lost potential, and the bugs could make the game at times completely unplayable. The game suffered from the accelerated development, having barely half the development time, and you can see where the seams show. The UI is clunky and gets cluttered when you have to manage items. Level design is similarly a nuisance, as they are big sprawling expanses without a lot of content in them. Part of that is a necessity to the mechanics, smaller levels would have other encounter designs being agro’d into it, but the levels are still expansive, empty, and a slog to get through. The Peragus mining facility is too large by half, and there’s a lot of backtracking in these levels. Since side quests encourage finding a doodad or killing a few key figures scattered around a map, that means a lot of trekking through these big levels to find one particular item or enemy locked in a corner somewhere. That can be very tedious, particularly on repeat playthroughs. At times, it feels like legging your way through a swamp to get to the next piece of delicious content.

Which is a good segue into talking what I like about the game, because its writing and characters are superb. The character companions are twists of classic Star Wars archetypes. Atton is the scoundrel Han Solo non-Force user type, but ends up having a disturbingly dark backstory where he was a Sith interrogator and feared his own Force-sensitive nature. Bao-Dur is a man haunted by the weapon of mass destruction he created, a tech-head who ends up hating his most momentous creation but feels the need to use it yet again. Canderous has become the new Mandalore and is desperately trying to revitalize his dying culture because he’s been so broken by Revan’s departure. The Wookie life-debt is so toxic that it breaks Hanharr and Mira in their own ways. Visas is a Sith whose will is shattered. Each of these characters are fundamentally broken (save for the droids, unless you count the physical need to reassemble HK-47 as broken), and the Exile draws them to him or her. Through discovering more about them and resolving it, the Exile awakens the characters’ connection to the Force, oddly ironic since the Exile is cut off from the Force and is only rediscovering it. Like most Bioware RPG’s, you the player through your character guide the growth of these characters and form a relationship with them, or use them for your own ends.

Kreia, of course, deserves her own paragraph. Kreia is the Star Wars Ravel Puzzlewell, an embittered woman who wants to destroy the cosmic chains of the universe and loves the player character in a deeply obsessive way, one that’s played completely straight in how it makes the player uncomfortable. She is deeply resentful of the Force and wants to destroy it, and through the Exile, who managed to cut themselves off so utterly completely in a unique way, she sees the path. Of course, the reason why the Exile cut themselves off was the mass death at Malachor V was so overwhelming that he or she would have otherwise died. Of course, her obsession and overriding mission cares little for the Exile’s own pain, and so the manipulations begin, using you to lure out and destroy the Jedi and the Sith, and in the end, you disappoint her, either because you don’t learn her lessons or she discovers that the only reason you were the way you were was because you were afraid. She still is obsessed over you, though, and so when you finally confront her, she obliges that affection to explain everything, unusually honest for a woman whose Sith name is evocative of the word betrayal. And fortunately, she allows something that most monologue villains don’t allow, a means by which to tell her she’s full of shit. Certainly, it’s a little weaker coming from her as an option to you rather than the player character saying it themselves, but I think it’s stronger, since so much of the ending had to be cut anyway it reinforces the ambiguity of it, that the ending is what you believe. Personal belief has always been important for the Exile and Kreia/Traya, and letting that transfer to the player is, while perhaps not the most ideal, completely valid given how rushed the development was. 

The other Sith Lords are fascinating concepts of evil and personal belief as well as well, and really show the Dark Side of the force in a parasitic, corrupt sense and the horrible ends of taking belief to its extreme. Darth Sion is the Lord of Pain. He cannot die but he feels pain constantly, making eternal life not a blessing but a torture, though in it he found a twisted source of enlightenment. His pain fuels his anger and hatred (key ingredients of the Dark Side) and so he persists solely through the Dark Side. Darth Nihilus, on the other hand, had his body obliterated by the Mass Shadow Generator, and so persisted as a wound in the Force, consuming Force energy to feed his relentless hunger. He is not a human anymore but a force of endless consumption that cannot be satiated, this hunger pain pushes him past his own mortal existence but which can only consume, not live. This perfectly illustrates the Dark Side concept of pursuit of power even past the point of sustainability, for Nihilus will continue consuming until all existence has been eaten.

The game is dark and moody, as you explore a shattered galaxy. In the original game, the search led to the Star Forge and the revelation that you the player was Revan. The sequel shows that there was no grand conspiracy; the act of Malachor built Nihilus and Sion and the player themselves was something that you did. It was not a conspiracy of Jedi but rather the after-effects of a particular action, much the way Lonesome Road had the Courier’s delivery of the package to Hopeville to be something that destroyed Ulysses even though you never met him. The Mass Shadow Generator was meant to save the galaxy from the Mandalorians but birthed a new, more powerful tragedy. Bao-Dur even wonders if the subjugation of the people under the Mandalorians was better than the power of the Mass Shadow Generator, a powerful moment ordered by just a mere single Jedi, built by a mere tech specialist. In true Planescape fashion, a personal apocalypse is a galactic apocalypse and vice-versa. Torment lingers over this game, in the broken characters, in a parallel journey both outward and inward. In many ways KOTOR2 was Planescape: Torment in the Star Wars universe, albeit with its own personal flair.

Alright, that’s a good review. I can do character analyses of some of the major characters if you want.

Thanks for the question, Messanger.

[cle-guy]

Elrond by Rene Gross

[cle-guy]

I think this is a bit overly judgmental. Sure you could argue that it would be more ‘open’ to say “the person” instead of “the man” but this feels like a quibble and not a critique. I suspect Ned would approve if Arya found herself ruling some keep (or Winterfell for that matter) and saw her passing judgement and then debating whether she made the right call and then swing the sword (or not). I don’t think Ned would go “no I meant MAN” nor do I think Ned would be judging Bran (if he wound up in the same spot) and judge him for not being able to swing the sword personally. The saying is far more about a morality of judgment than anything else.

Ned believes that "the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword" and that "a ruler who hides behind executioners soon forgets what death is". Do you think he would hold a female ruler to these standards? I know most people wouldn't expect a noblewoman to take a man's head off herself, but would Ned think she ought to witness the execution? Or would he believe that a lady shouldn't see such things? After all, he didn't take Arya and Sansa to the execution at the beginning of the series.

I think "the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword" is an excellent early demonstration of how sexist and ableist the setting is. Because that part of the quote isn't all of the lesson.

"The blood of the First Men still flows in the veins of the Starks, and we hold to the belief that the man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die. "One day, Bran, you will be Robb's bannerman, holding a keep of your own for your brother and your king, and justice will fall to you. When that day comes, you must take no pleasure in the task, but neither must you look away. A ruler who hides behind paid executioners soon forgets what death is." Bran I, AGoT, emphasis mine.

What Ned's talking about is rulers being responsible for their actions. Considering the consequences of their decisions. Universally applicable.

And how does it get boiled down in terms of quoteable quotes? "The man who passes the sentence must swing the sword." A line that does not even contemplate that someone other than a man might rule, and a line that does not even contemplate a person who is not physically capable of carrying out an execution might rule.

So to answer your question, Ned's a product of his society. He's not thinking about how an AFAB ruler should conduct themselves at all.

[cle-guy]

To defend Anakin a bit: Anakin isn’t the only Jedi. Your bloodline doesn’t give you the power in and of itself. I had no issue with Anakin being literally created by the Force. We have hundreds of examples of Jedi who are just normal people! So Anakin himself doesn’t undermine the idea that a special bloodline isn’t the key to the Force; he is but one among many.

What I DO have an issue with is making Rey the child of Palpatine. Her story was far more powerful in the Last Jedi than Rise of Skywalker. Granted. I don’t think they did anything right in IX.

When you talk about secret bloodlines in the Star Wars, are you referring Anakin Skywalker being the subject of a prophecy, complete with a virgin birth, rather than just being a Jedi who went bad? Anakin/Darth Vader being Luke’s father was a important plot point in the original trilogy.

Yeah, I was referring to the virgin birth and the midichlorians nonsense when I mentioned the prequels in my previous post. I said my piece about Anakin some time ago, but yeah, I think Anakin should be a nobody from a backwater planet - because, as with Rey and The Last Jedi, the point is that anyone can be a Jedi because...

I'm even fine with the prophecy about someone bringing balance to the Force (although maybe don't use the words "Chosen One" directly because you don't actually have to hit the audience in the head with a copy of Hero of a Thousand Faces). As I said in my post linked above, I think there's potential to do a neat reverse on the audience by questioning what "balance" means, because if you're going to rip off Taoism you really ought to follow through on it rather than reverting to a more Western Christian conception of good and evil. And you can build that into Vader's tragic arc and Luke/Rey's triumphal arcs.

I think the original trilogy - although really it's just Empire and Return, because they hadn't come up with the idea during New Hope - handled the father/son thing better, where it's more about the whole Campbellian patricide v. reconciliation thing as opposed to "your magic blood makes you better at the Force than other people, because universal spiritual forces care about hereditary succession for some reason."

[cle-guy]

If I recall correctly, you aren't a fan of the Green New Deal. What problems do you have with it specifically? I don't think it is a secret or a hot take to suggest that the United States needs to invest more in renewable clean energy to combat global warming (more like mitigate it). But what about the details of the GND do you have an issue with?

If all it ever did was chart a method to carbon neutrality or carbon-negative power generation, that would be one thing. It doesn't do that, it's a policy as grandiose as it is threadbare. What little we have is very weak on substance, ignores a great deal of substantive and effective environmental reforms (carbon taxation, adjustable border rates) and carbon-neutral energy generation (nuclear power), and devotes massive spending to policies that are politically unworkable and do little if anything to help reduce carbon emissions. In short, the GND is a deeply unserious proposal from deeply unserious people.

My problem is that the economic underpinnings of the proposals outlined in the GND rely on MMT, which is fringe economic pseudoscience. It rests on a misunderstanding of fiat currency and has a long track record of its concepts not panning out in practice. It's central premise of currency valuation being fixed due to its utility in the satisfaction of public debt (taxation), is invalidated for the fact that currency is often used in the satisfaction of private debt (purchasing of goods and services between consumer and seller) due to its utility as a convenient medium - hence why when more money is printed, prices rise in the form of inflation, to maintain the currency's utility in the satisfaction of private debt. While L. Randall Wray might argue that there is no "simple proportionate relationship exists between rises in the money supply and rises in the general price level," history and the economic present handily rebut this thesis. Printing money doesn't change overall supply, and so prices adjust to compensate for the eroded worth of currency; this has been proven time and time again. We've seen what elevated interest rates do to countries that feel their sting - they reduce climate targets and restart coal energy to boost energy production to reduce energy costs and stave off domestic discontent. Moreover, the idea of a 10-year national mobilization will simply fail to sustain itself when inflationary pressures force a change of government and the project is cancelled, which means a whole lot of wasted time and wasted resources on a vanity process. As long as this pseudoscience continues to dominate their thinking, I must accept that GND proponents are an obstacle to substantive climate reform.

Thanks for the question, Bruin.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

How effective were bayonet charges and when did they cease being part of military strategy?

So believe it or not, most of the time when a bayonet charge happened, the enemy fled rather than face it. That's quite effective, because not only do you break up an enemy formation, but you do it without losing too much of your own fighting strength. Casualties for bayonets were actually fairly low, although in some circumstances they could be higher, such as the legendary 1951 charge on Bayonet Hill which was the last official US Army-ordered bayonet charge. However, the British army has used bayonet charges in Iraq and Afghanistan, including one in 2011. Most armies still train with bayonets although they are usually considered more of a weapon of last resort than a desired technique.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[cle-guy]

Since the dissolution of the USSR was mentioned is it not true that many SSRs preferred to retain the USSR? Wasn’t it Russian nationalism more than the periphery which caused the breakup (the Baltic states being notable for being obvious exceptions since they declared independence swiftly IIRC); could a democratic version of the USSR have survived?

It wasn't just Russian nationalism. Ethnic riots broke out in Dushanbe between nationalist Tajiks and ethnic Armenians who had fled to Tajikistan fleeing the Sumgait pogrom. SImilar outbreaks happened in Osh between Kyrgyz nationalists and Uzbeks around the same time. Low-level ethnic riots had frequently been seen in a variety of the SSR's, often in response to the appointment of ethnic Russian officials such as Gennady Kolbun, whose 1986 appointment as Kazakh general secretary rankled the populace there.

Much of the SSR's did vote in favor of the referendum, which asked the question: "do you consider it necessary to preserve the USSR as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics, which will be fully ensured of human rights and freedoms of any nationality?" The reasons they voted yes vary wildly, including long-term patriotic education, fear of renewed ethnic conflict if the Soviet Union would disintegrate, bureaucratic inertia, dependence on imports from other regions of the Soviet Union for raw materials or finished goods that couldn't or weren't produced domestically, apprehension that such a large shift would create upheaval, and sincere belief that the Soviet Union could live up to that promise of a federation of equal sovereign republics. Many of the population of the SSR's sincerely believed in the promise and premise of the Soviet Union, Soviet communism, and international proletariatism, and believe that a decentralized version of the Soviet Union could have emerged, if we take their speeches and statements as genuine.

The August Coup changed that. When Communist hardliners seized Gorbachev, many lost faith in the Soviet ability to establish what they promised. The people took to the streets to defend the Russian Duma's White House, including Yeltsin. Ukraine, a country that had voted 71.5% on the referendum just four months prior, overwhelming passed a declaration of independence. Many of the other SSR's were supportive of their own declarations of independence in 4Q 1991. By September, Gorbachev barely had any power to influence events outside of Moscow.

Chris Miller, in his book The Struggle to Save the Soviet Economy, argues that Gorbachev could have saved the Soviet Union had he not been betrayed by the CPSU. Plenty of theorists argue that Gorbachev would have attempted to reform the Soviet Union into a decentralized multi-party democratic federative republic following a social market economy, and that could have very well preserved the Soviet Union, but the republics needed to have faith in the Union that was irreparably shattered by the August Coup. I'm less sanguine, I think the Soviet economic system couldn't have delivered a tangible increase in standard of living before the people would have lost faith in a different way. Standards of living in the Soviet Union were always lower than they were in Eastern Europe, and I think the rapid growth of the Baltic States would have caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union regardless.

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King