#( there's no better example and i do work with examples in writing )

[nicodiangelato]

Here's what I do that helps me get stuff done on time without stressing myself sick:

Split tasks up into their bare, basic components. Then, make a checklist of each component. Planners are my best friends, because I have an easier time remembering to do something if I write it down.

I find it a lot easier for me, motivation wise, to get through an essay by writing :

"do research/ find sources,

find quotations and create citations,

create an outline,

write paragraph (1,2,3, etc.),

edit rough draft,

create final draft"

because I can check off each little part and still feel like I'm making real, tangible progress vs. just putting down "turn in essay by (deadline)" in my planner.

Then, figure out what's the absolute *bare minimum* you need to do each day (or any other incriment of time that fits your schedule) to meet your deadline. Whatever it is, make sure to add an extra day or two as padding, so you can meet that deadline even if something comes up. Don't be afraid of asking for extensions or setting up accomodations. Be realistic with your limitations and time constraints.

For example: I have 5 hours of lecture I need to get through over Thanksgiving break to meet a deadline. Over 6 days, I need to watch at least 45 mins of a lecture each day. For me, 45 of lecture time is doable over a day because I know I dont have to do it all in one sitting. Realistically, I know it will take me anywhere from 1-5 hours to watch and take notes for these 45 minutes of lecture, because I am preemptively assuming I will need to take some breaks in between.

Breaks: when I get bored, I dont fight it. Instead, I take time to pivot. This is particularly helpful when I find myself doing something I have no interest in, and my brain does not for any reason want to let me do it. I take the time to scroll aimlessly, but also to get a drink/eat/use the restroom. I'm actually writing this while on a hw break right now. And when I get back from my break, all my stuff is in the same place where I left it at my desk, so I have a much better time easing my way into being productive again. If I still don't wanna work on what I was before, I start working on something relatively quick & easy from my to do list that I *do* want to do and ride the wave of productivity I get from finishing that.

The last part: reward yourself for the small victories. Yes checking things off a to do list is fun, but so are stickers. My planners are FULL of gold stars, smiley faces, and cute character stickers. There's a reason teachers use them, they are amazing motivators.

There's a bunch of adhd advice out there that's like "people with adhd tend to work better under deadlines due to the anxiety so here are ways to artificially induce a stress response in order to get you to get work done" and it's like well what if I don't want to be stressed out all the time in order to function

[qqueenofhades]

hi I hope you don't mind but I would love to hear your long tired historian rant you mentioned in your tags on that one post, if you feel in the mood to share? (no pressure!)

(also thank you for existing, you do wonderful work and the world is a better place for you being in it)

Aha. Well. For context, the mention of said rant was in relation to this post:

Basically, this post struck a nerve because of how it exactly encapsulates the anti-intellectual, anti-academia, anti-historical, anti-reality thinking that is absolutely rampant in social media spaces, even and especially spaces that identify as leftist, liberal, or otherwise "superior" to the right wing when it comes to identifying fake news or misinformation. (Example A: anything ever written by a self-proclaimed leftist on Twitter.) We all know that there are huge problems with the American public school system (and the people writing this are almost always American) and the American practice of education in general, and that yes, there are many things that happened in the past (or y'know, the present!) that are not taught very well, or at all. But because the American public school system is so decentralized and largely autonomous, incredibly dependent on the temperament of local superintendents and/or school boards, taxation and funding, availability of teachers, requirement of useless standardized tests, etc., it is very difficult (if not outright impossible) to claim that this is the result of a Unified Grand Conspiracy To Not Teach Real History To The Youth In Order To Make Them Mindlessly Support Capitalism. That is the exact sort of deranged conspiratorial thinking that the right wing does and fits everything into a sinister narrative about how "They" are planning to keep you ignorant and therefore nothing harmful that you ever think or do is really your fault. It's not good.

(Whoosh. That was very calm and reasonable of me. For the rest of this post, please just picture Captain Holt "apparently that's a trigger for me" dot gif.)

Also: even in public school, and despite the Republicans' best efforts, there are plenty of opportunities to study complex or "controversial" subjects. For example, I spend a week every June grading AP Euro History exams with a lot of other educators in a giant windowless steel box (woo-hoo, fun times!) Every year, there are questions on the exam about women's rights, imperialism and exploitation, slavery/race relations, the development of capitalism and the current economic model, religion and science, the history of labor, and other topics that would be considered "controversial" if you're an idiot. This is an exam taken by high school students in all grades from across the country, and there are also AP World History and APUSH (US history) exams every year which are doubtless making an effort to address similar themes. This is an advanced program, yes, but it's widely available to many schools and is not a result of a sinister plot to keep the youth from discovering the truth. Also: you live in an era of absolutely unprecedented access to information. Put down the ChatGPT bullshit generator and visit a goddamn public library. Or even open Wikipedia. The tools are there for you to start educating yourself and they are so easy to find!!!!!

The "Historians Are Hiding The Truth!!!" narrative becomes even more ridiculous in university-level or professional academic historical-study spaces, especially when historical educators and associations (such as the American Historical Association) have been at the forefront of pushing back against right-wing efforts to censor history, punish teachers, and remove culture-war subjects from classrooms. Also as someone who has advanced degrees in history, has taught/worked in several universities in different countries, writes and publishes historical research, and otherwise participates professionally in the field: trust me, we aren't "hiding" shit. There are vigorous debates and disagreements on various bogglingly obscure subjects and points of clarification and so forth, but that doesn't mean we're not talking about them (trust me, we're often talking about them too much). If you're issuing confident blanket statements about how "historians are conspiring to hide x," you're an idiot.

This also has dangerous repercussions in the field of, say, politics and civics, where a lot of absolutely braindead Online Leftists have spent the last four years posting deranged nonsense on social media and then, whenever they're called out on it for that not actually being how anything works at all, whining that "I was never taught this!!!" (And yet, it somehow never actually changes their perspective or their theories....) They whine about how "they didn't know this" and it was someone else's fault, they make up total fantasy about what the Biden administration did or should have done and now are still happy about Trump coming back because "It will teach the Democrats a lesson!!!" and otherwise accelerating us oh-so-quickly down that slippery slippery fascism slope. Their weaponized ignorance and their magical fantasies about what "should" have happened often come back to this same learned helplessness, where it's everyone else's fault (especially Capitalism's) that they're total wankers. Look: I'm not a goddamn fan of capitalism either. But we all grew up in this same system, and some of us aren't raving idiots, so at some point, you have to take the tiniest modicum of personal responsibility for the information you seek out, the content you consume, the opinions you propagate, and the people you surround yourself with. Shocking.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Online Leftists are actively and unrepentantly enabling American fascism and should be treated in the same way as we treat MAGA when it comes to deciding what is good or worthwhile information. This is because their entire political philosophy (insofar as their beliefs can be dignified with the term) is based on the "make shit up and remove it from any basic empirical references, grounding in reality, or 'should I run the most basic Google search and see if I'm completely talking out of my ass in a distorted social media echo chamber? Nah I'm good' " technique. This is, as the original tweet above references, trying to retcon sheer malicious laziness and stupidity into grand ideological theories about how it's actually "better" that they don't know a damn thing and won't shut up. It's your evil history teacher's fault, or "academics are all rich and elitist" (ask any academic-precariat person like me and we will laugh hollowly and then throw monkey poop at you), or "They" wouldn't let you learn this, or on and on. Even in our terrible, awful, no-good very-bad timeline, there are still ample tools to educate yourself, to learn how to filter out bad information and junk news, and otherwise gird yourself even a little for the even-more-massive assault on empirical reality that we are about to experience in the next four years (ugh). I suggest you take advantage of them.

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

I know you’ve said in the past that you don’t think switching marinette and adrien’s kwamis would solve anything writing-wise, but do you think having the kwamis switch personalities would do the trick? marinette still has ladybug/creation, but with plagg’s personality, and adrien still has black cat/destruction, but with tikki’s personality. thoughts?

No, I don't think that this would fix anything because it's approaching the problem as if the issue is some flaw in the show's base setup. As if you have to make major changes for Miraculous to work. My stance has always been that the base setup is totally fine. The problem is the execution. In fact, I think that the current kwami personalities are a great choice, the problem is that they're not being used well.

Marinette has a pretty strong personality. She knows what she wants, but has a tendency to get caught up in her own head and a tendency to make snap judgments. Those tendencies make her occasionally fail to consider alternate paths or points of view. That means that what she needs most is someone who will make her consider those alternatives. Someone who will be direct, talk her out of mental spirals, and keep her focused. A voice of reason, if you will. Tikki is perfectly suited to that role. She is not the kind of kwami to sit passively by. Plagg, on the other hand, would just encourage Marinette along the path of glorious chaos or let her do whatever she wants so long as he gets his cheese. While I think that could be genuinely fun to watch, it's not really benefiting Marinette much and this ask appears to be treating the Kwamis as potential mentors, so I will, too.

Adrien is a little more complex. Given his rather depressing home life, I can see why someone would want to pair him with loving Tikki over more-detached Plagg, but I'll explain why I think that Plagg is the better fit IF you actually let him mentor.

Adrien is a passive follower. He never fights for himself and he bows to authority at the drop of a hat. While those traits are arguably strengths for his role on the battlefield, they're not great for him in his day-to-day life. There's nothing wrong with being more passive and more of a follower, but he needs to learn that he can make his own choices, too. The best way to do that is to give him the kind of mentor who doesn't just hand him the answers. Someone a little chaotic whose style is subtle pushes and not just handing him a possible path to take because Adrien would absolutely just take the suggested path. Plagg is perfectly suited to taking on this style of mentorship and it is a crime that the show never let him shine.

Example scenario: Adrien feeling left out in season four. (Note the following is a very rough draft)

Adrien: I feel like Ladybug doesn't need me anymore. She keeps calling in other heroes! Tikki: You need to talk to Ladybug and tell her how you feel! Ask her when she's free to meet up! Adrien: Okay, what should I say? Tikki: Tells him what to say.

This is solid advice, but Tikki is just handing Adrien an answer. He's probably not going to learn from this and may even flub up his talk with Ladybug without Tikki walking him through it because he's just doing what he's told and not coming to this path on his own. Contrast this to Plagg in his ultimate form (by which I mean mentor Plagg, not eldritch horror Plagg):

Adrien: I feel like Ladybug doesn't need me anymore. She keeps calling in other heroes! Plagg: And you're left watching from the sidelines every time? Adrien: No, not always. Plagg: So she's sharing the cheese now? Giving you slices instead of the whole wheel? Adrien: yeah, I guess. Plagg: why? Adrien: what do you mean why? Plagg: why'd she start sharing? Adrien: I don't know. Plagg: Huh. Too bad. If only there was a way you could find out. I guess it will remain a mystery. Adrien: (annoyed) Ladybug knows! Plagg: And? Adrien: And... I guess I could ask her? Plagg: I mean, if you started sharing my cheese, I'd be demanding answers! Adrien: I'd never share your cheese! Plagg: You promise? Never? Not even if you were starving? Adrien: Well, I mean, I guess I might if it was an emergency or something, but I wouldn't share it without a good reason! Plagg: And Ladybug's different? Adrien: What do you mean? Plagg: She does things without a good reason? Adrien: Of course not! She's brilliant! She always has a plan! Plagg: Interesting. Might want to keep that in mind for your little talk. Adrien: (after a thoughtful pause) So you think I should talk to her? Plagg: Is there another way for you to find out what's going on? Adrien: No. Plagg: Then why are you bothering me? Sounds like you only have one option!

Note that Plagg never gives Adrien a clear answer here. He just asks questions in a bored manner and lets Adrien think things through. He's guiding Adrien to a specific answer, but making Adrien really think about it, better prepping him for the coming talk. This mentorship style would drive Marinette crazy, but I think it would do wonders for Adrien! The difference is that, in this situation, Marinette probably already knows what she needs to do and is just avoiding it while Adrien genuinely needs help realizing that he can speak up. This doesn't mean that Adrien should never get direct, clear advice, I just wouldn't make that the standard as it's not helping him with his passivity.

All of this is a big part of why I love Plagg so much. That little cheese gremlin is just brimming with potential and it saddens me greatly that canon will never give it to us. They gave him the perfect personality, they just missed the fine details of how that personality should function as a mentor.

[tamtam-go92]

To the people who are writing fiction (or anything, it actually doesn't matter) are you writing stuff in your mother tongue first and later translate it to the other language (let's just assume it's English). I'm asking, 'cause I got that problem, that my whole communication on the web is in English and I also tend to write my fiction in English, but sometimes I feel like I should really also work on my prose in my mother tongue German (if I really want to get something published like in the distant future). And of course I have a better expression in German, 'cause German is a great language for prose and poetry, if you ask me. It's very descriptive, and I love how you can just build words by putting them together. But while writing in German, I recently tend to stumble over passages where I exactly know how I would put it in English, but I can't come up with a good German phrase for it. And if I want my fan fiction for example to be read, or my Simblr to be read, I need to publish it in English, and it's kinda easier to just write in English in the first place, even if it's not as elaborate as it would be if I wrote it in German. I really lost the point of this post by now. I guess I just wanted to know which language you prefer using when writing. So let's make this a poll. I like polls. xD

[arehera]

Ackermann's Demons

A Recursive Game (200 Words Sans Title and Heading, Pro-Archival)

The Archmagus Ackermann has SUMMONED you, a foul DEMON, bound by your Name:___ and CHARGED to seek forbidden KNOWLEDGE. Occult tomes, forgotten spells, grim artifacts, horrid rituals, they tempt you. Have a taste of what is on offer!

ACKERMANN'S AGGRAVATING ARMOIRE

This foul furniture has been ensorcled to inconvenience its user. Reaching into it will produce only clashing outfits. In addition, socks stored inside lose their partners, only to reappear and force their owner to go through the pain of losing them twice!

Now go! You are imbued with WILL and must pursue KNOWLEDGE. You are bound by the RULES OF DEMONS.

1. DEMONS RETURN TO HELL! When your WILL is expended your time is up. Find one last piece of KNOWLEDGE and RETURN all your KNOWLEDGE to your SUMMONER.

2. DEMONS DON'T WORK FOR NOTHING! While you still have WILL but no KNOWLEDGE, go discover! Expend a WILL to discover one piece of forbidden KNOWLEDGE.

3. DEMONS ARE LAZY! Assemble your KNOWLEDGE and destroy one piece, sacrificing it to SUMMON a new DEMON. It has the same WILL as you, takes all of your KNOWLEDGE, and obeys the RULES OF DEMONS. Expend a WILL as you await its RETURN.

Ackermann's Demon is a game about recursion, frustration, and waste. It's a game about bureaucracy. If you choose to play it you'll find that not only do you quickly create a tangle of demons but that most demons sit around and wait, that most discovered knowledge is destroyed, and that it all takes longer than it should.

These three rules, A(0,n)=n+1 (RETURN), A(m,0)=A(m-1,1) (DISCOVER), and A(m,n)=A(m-1,A(m, n-1)) (SUMMON) describe the Ackermann function as developed by Péter and Robinson. While it is significant to mathematics as a piece of the history of computability theory it's perhaps better known for growing extremely quickly.

Starting with 0 or 1, or 2 WILL is relatively safe. Starting with 3 WILL grows quickly, especially if you start with any additional KNOWLEDGE.

Starting a game with 4 WILL and 1 KNOWLEDGE or 5 WILL results in a game that ends with 65,553 pieces of KNOWLEDGE. And that's just the knowledge that isn't destroyed.

A game played according to these rules with more than 5 WILL, with 5 WILL and any KNOWLEDGE, or with 4 WILL and more than 2 KNOWLEDGE cannot finish in the lifetime of our universe.

This game can be reskinned. I would recommend maintaining the Péter and Robinson definition, with two stats and three rules. For example, Ackermann's Office, where you use your SALARY to write REPORTS and your rules are to CLOCK OUT, WRITE, and SUBCONTRACT, which may be a bit on the nose.

This game can be freely reproduced. If you decide to play it please let me know.

200 Word RPGs 2024

Each November, some people try to write a novel. Others would prefer to do as little writing as possible. For those who wish to challenge their ability to not write, we offer this alternative: producing a complete, playable roleplaying game in two hundred words or fewer.

This is the submission thread for the 2024 event, running from November 1st, 2024 through November 30th, 2024. Submission guidelines can be found in this blog's pinned post, here.

[kryptonbabe]

You will get a new Wonder Woman run planned to be a long and structured one - but it's written by Tom King

You will get a new Black Canary run - the thing is, it will be written by Tom King

You will get a series of some silver age partially forgotten characters you like - Adam Strange, Omega Men, Metamorpho - but here's the catch: they'll all be written by Tom King

Why all these times I got something I wanted from DC it was like meeting this wise and cruel Jinn trying to warn me about the potential harm of my heart's desires?

"Be careful what you wish for, little one. Now take this Tom King book" the creature whispers while I sob

[sea-buns]

Forgive me if I'm a bit nervous about Gorgug this season. It's just that the last Zac Oyama pc was Colin Provolone, who was arguably one of his greatest D20 performances, if not the greatest.

Zac always does great with every pc he plays, but Colin was something else. He came out swinging with actions and words that were teeming with unspoken emotional baggage. The way Colin's presence affected the other pcs; there was this level of depth that I don't think I've seen in any of his other characters. It was understated and quiet in that signature "just a guy" way that he tends to be, while still captivating everyone instantly with just how raw it was.

Not to say we haven't seen emotional depth in Gorgug. It's just that, compared to the other Bad Kids, Gorgug's journey and progression as a character has been very... impersonal? Like, yes, he found his birth parents, and he found friends who appreciate him, and he faced his insecurities about his intelligence, and he navigated relationship troubles, and his trial through the claustrophobic bug-tunnels was a horrifically-uncanny parallel to how he's spent his entire life trying to make himself as small as possible.

But how much of that has actually changed him from the Gorgug we started with? I would agree that he's definitely happier with his life, given all the loving and supportive people that have been added to it when it used to be just him and his parents. And he's certainly grown into himself and become more self-assured in his abilities, even if he's still, and always will be, our anxious little guy. And there's nothing wrong with that. I've always liked how Gorgug was a representation of all the little things. The subtle acts and kindnesses that don't seem like much to most, but to some are everything.

We don't need another Bad Kid living in fear that their mouth could be shit-in at any moment. We've already got one-too-many.

All that being said, I just feel like Gorgug's personal story beats are much easier to sweep under the rug than everyone else's. He has the same soft and understated quality that Colin held, but they lack that extra oomph that pushed Colin over the edge from being just another guy in a series of dudes, to a character that the vast majority of us could not get out of our heads. He took someone who was anxious and softspoken, who ultimately never wanted to be violent— someone who is remarkably similar to Gorgug in many ways— and maintained that demeanor and core in Colin's character while still hitting us in the feels with character development at max velocity at every turn.

I think Zac gets better and better at this with every season that goes by. With each new character, there is always something that leaves me stunned in awe. And it's been, what, three? Four years since we last saw Gorgug?

I'm just,,, I'm cautiously optimistic but also going into a bit of a worry about what violence this man may inflict upon us

[problemswithbooks]

BNHA Ch. 429

So, I guess Toga is dead, and people are losing it.

I get why people liked her--she was actually queer, being pan/bisexual. She was representation for them and that's rare in shonen manga. But here's the thing--she was bad representation at best and insulting at worst. Nor do I think she was made queer because Hori really wanted to represent a queer girl. Himiko was always the author's poorly hidden fetish--she just was. She liked girls as much as boys because Hori wanted to draw a girl touching sexually on another girl. You can see this in how he draws her and Ochako in solo pics together.

I mean, people seem to understand this when it comes to Momo and her outfit being overly sexual or that both Himiko and Hagakure's Quirks either leave them naked or they have to be naked to use them. These are excuses to draw girls in a sexual manner. Himiko being into other girls is the same thing and that's the kindest interpretation.

Given how Himiko acts and her Quirk being heavily coded sexual desire, and therefore her use of it against someone unwilling being sexual assault, it could just being playing into harmful stereotypes of predatory gays.

As a queer person myself I just found Toga insulting. She was designed to be overly sexual and give the male author a female character that he could draw being suggestive with his other female characters. When he did flesh out her character, her backstory was eventually the trope/fear of straight people, that gay people will be so overcome with their lust that they end up sexually assaulting them.

In the end Ochako accepts this part of Toga and says she'll giver her blood forever, but as much as a lot of readers took that that as some deep lesbian confession, for me it really fell flat. Hori never really gave any of the main kids time to actually learn about their villain or show how that changed their minds toward them. Shoto only works because Touya is his brother (even though he admits he barely remembers him). But Ochako goes from not thinking of Toga at all pre-first war, to one thought about her during her speech, to suddenly caring about her so much she--given how Toga's quirk is coded, is willing to essentially fulfill Toga's kink for the rest of their lives.

It's weird and it comes out of nowhere. It's made even stranger because Toga doesn't actually change or show remorse for anything she did, which included personally hunting and murdering people before she joined the LOV. None of the death and destruction she is also partially responsible for is brought up either, something that Ochako was rightfully upset about during the first war when less people and property had been destroyed. Ochako just accepts everything about her suddenly and her past serious crimes are forgotten so they can cuddle and cry.

Am I shocked Toga died--a little. I didn't think Hori would have the guts to kill off a young girl character, especially one that he clearly got a lot of joy drawing in sexy poses. But at the same time, once he killed off Shigaraki and ended Touya's story with his slow death, I'm not surprised he went the same route with Toga.

This isn't Naruto--Hori isn't really kind to characters that do something wrong, especially if they don't try and change. Enji, Bakugo, Hawks, and Aoyama all sort of got punished for what they did. Enji is the worst off, being permanently crippled, missing an arm and burned everywhere. Bakugo's hand is damaged, his heart weaker, plus he feels bad that Izuku lost his Quirk so they can't compete the same way he wanted them to. Aoyama, despite doing way less wrong and even helping his class during the forest raid, still leaves school because he doesn't feel he earned being there yet. Hawks lost his Quirk and even though him running the HPSC could be seen as good for him, Hawks always wanted a break, but now he has one of the most time consuming and stressful jobs out there.

So, if this is what characters who actively did good things and even changed and fought to be better get, what would characters who never changed and never did anything positive for anyone but their friends/themselves get?

Before the last Arc started, when so many people said the LoV were 100% going to be redeemed I had doubts and always thought it wouldn't make sense with how the story presented redemption or treated other non-LoV villains in the past. That if the main LoV did get some happy ending where they were bffs with the main cast it would clash with how other characters had been treated.

That doesn't mean that I think how Shigaraki, Toga, and Touya ended up in the manga was well done. I think their endings fit far better then a last minute redemption would have, but at the same time you can feel how rushed everything has been since the end of the first war arc. Hori was done with this story months if not years ago, yet he was contractually obligated to finish it. Because of that I think he left out as much as possible. As much as I think he's written some pretty obsessive stuff, particularly towards women, I can't really fully blame him cutting corners or the story being shit at the end.

We know Manga authors, particularly those that work with Jump are treated like shit. That they suffer incredibly long hours at times not even getting to go home for days. We've gotten messages for Hori saying he's sick quite a few times. On top of that, weekly story telling is not a great way to tell a cohesive narrative. Ideas probably change week to week or at least month to month and you can't go back and change the last chapter no matter how much you need or want to. Then you remember he also gave a lot of ideas to the people who made the movies, which would also change his plans for how he wanted the main story to go.

The story is bad--it has been for a while, but I think a lot of people put their hopes on their favorite characters getting a happy ending, even when there were signs that probably wasn't going to be the case. I know how much it sucks when a character you love gets a shitty ending (Stain was my fav, but he got an absolute dogshit ending) but at least, knowing what I know about the industry I can't really blame Hori the way I see some other people doing. Criticize it, sure, but saying Hori hates his readers or is horrible writer isn't true. BNHA was popular for a reason--he's great with characters and the beginning of the story had some great pacing. We'll never know, but I wouldn't be surprised if BNHA could have been amazing if Hori had been treated better and the story hadn't needed a chapter every week.

If anything BNHA has taught me how much a story suffers when authors/artists are treated like crap and forced to work past burnout.

[sapphiresonstrings]

I think people think about LitRPGs backwards. It's not that the LitRPG formula makes bad stories palatable - it's the opposite. The LitRPG formula isn't appealing at all. The structure of a LitRPG guides writers to write stories that are legitimately better on a structural level than what they could otherwise write. LitRPG has a reputation for terrible writing because writers who are extremely bad can use the structure of LitRPG to write stories that actually work, which end up getting talked about. The same writers writing romance novels would never be talked about because they would be unreadable.

Consider Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, an all-around high quality book written by a talented author. Something that has always bothered me about Chamber of Secrets is the climax, Harry's fight against the Basilisk.

We have not been given any indication up to this point that Harry is capable of killing a Basilisk with a sword. In fact, the only skills Harry has been learning up to this point revolve around magic, which he does not use in the climax. His special ability to talk to snakes, which has been key to the plot up to this point, also does not come into play except to get him into the Chamber. Harry's emotional journey has not led him to a violent place, so his decision to kill another creature in a bloody and brutal fashion has no emotional significance to him. The Basilisk doesn't even bear Harry any ill-will, it's just attacking people because Voldemort told it to. The killing of the Basilisk is unprecedented, and would not be any more expected or meaningful if it happened at the beginning of the book than it is at the end.

I would argue that this is a problem, story-wise. The climax of a story should have something to do with the events leading up to it. The hero should use the lessons of the preceding parts of the story to overcome the challenge. This from a genuinely talented author, mind you, so my point is that this is an easy mistake to make.

It's also a really common mistake. Most action-packed climaxes in most stories are like this. Hollywood movies and genre novels love to end on some kind of violent action. It's widely understood that the end of a story is supposed to have a climax, so a lot of writers will put an action scene at the end of their story without connecting it to the rest of the plot in a thematic or emotional way.

If you make this mistake in a LitRPG, it's extremely obvious. If Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was a LitRPG, then the fact that Harry never kills anything with a melee weapon until the climax would be a glaring plot hole that could not be overlooked. Either JK would have to include a bunch of scenes in which Harry chops the heads off various other magical creatures, or she would have to reconsider how the Basilisk dies.

But now that Harry has to kill a bunch of other magical creatures with a magic sword, we're forced to consider the thematic implications of that. One way or another, Harry is now the kind of person who kills magical beasts with swords, which means the killing Basilisk is now forced by the constraints of the genre to become the conclusion of a long series of thematically related events.

The repetition inherent in a LitRPG forces the author to have recurring themes and to tie those themes into the overarching narrative whether they like it or not.

But once you have those recurring themes, once you've confronted them, you might as well convert the story into a better genre. And I say this as someone who likes LitRPGs.

This is all just scratching the surface of the ways LitRPGs force writers to write better. I just picked one example, but I could go on.

For another example, in other action-heavy fiction you will often see situations reverse themselves for no particular reason. The villain is the clear favorite to win the boxing match, presumably because he's a better boxer. But then in a surprise reversal the hero wins instead. In a good story there will be some kind of reason for this reversal (often emotional), but a bad story will just go through the beats because that's what you're supposed to do in this kind of movie. The music will swell, the hero will look up into the camera, and then the hero will win even though nothing has actually changed since we were informed that the villain was the favorite to win.

You literally cannot do this in a LitRPG. The quantification of everything means that something must change between the villain seeming to have the upper hand and the hero's ultimate victory. This doesn't automatically mean something emotionally relevant, but nobody said that all LitRPG is good. The point is that the structure of the narrative prevents you from accidentally skipping this step and papering it over with swelling dramatic music.

LitRPG where the protagonist's game system is very clearly from a game with a 20-minute day-night cycle, and whose gamification of hunger, thirst, and sleep just wreaks havoc on his personal and professional life.

Just kidding, litRPG protagonists don't have personal or professional lives.

[stardustdiiving]

You know perilous trails was a good quest when it singlehandedly improved Xiao’s fanon characterization by at least 50%. It seemed like more people began to realize that Xiao is far less of an edgy tsundere who’s snappy to everyone because he has #issues and far more like this tormented stray cat who stares at you from the secluded corner he won’t leave in the most poorly socialized and tense way imaginable when you try to coax him into approaching you because he is clearly starving and all alone in the rain and cold. He bristles defensively and bats at you if you get too close but every time you walk away and then look back you see he’s discreetly following you and is now staring at you intently from the bushes

[lycanr0t]

the other day V read me a post that was talking about perfectionism and half assing something while being a perfectionist is like whole assing something by most ppls standards and ive been thinking about it non stop

today i said to V that people seem to always think that perfectionists actually can achieve perfection, that theres a payoff to it. that its worth it. Perfectionists in fiction are hard workers and they DO make things perfect but i said the reality is that most perfectionists don't and can't actually get anywhere close to that. they hold themselves to a standard that's quite literally impossible to achieve and the mental weight of that leads to fucking up and over complicating things or simply never trying at all. because if people are going to be disappointed anyways you might as well save yourself from the time/effort/etc being wasted, right?

I guess like what I'm saying is perfectionism can appear like an unwillingness to try at all and it can appear like you're just not putting ""enough effort"" in and its not something that does actually have a payoff because perfect is not only subjective but also impossible. so cut yourself some slack and half ass shit life is way to short to spend fretting over every single detail

[pinkfey]

irt lrb my problem is that i LOVE neve’s character conceptually i just did not love her writing within the scope of tevinter specifically

[roseofhybrids]

was gonna write this in the tags, but it got way too long for that, so

short answer: If we're going purely off of the cannon material we've seen in the series I have to say too ambiguous to answer

long answer:

on one hand she did a lot of bad things, abuse, murder, siding with robo-satan

but on the other, we never got the chance to see what she would choose to do when truly free to make her own choices through the series, she's either under control of the Elliots or the solver. Which severely limits just how in control she can be of her own choices. Would standing up for your "boss and coworkers" against people and entities bent on abusing and killing them be the right thing to do? Definitely, but it's also a fast way to get yourself and them killed this isn't meant as a justification of any of her actions, just an explanation of why she'd choose them

and we don't get the chance to see if she'd continue choosing to act the way she did in the series after the solver gets defeated

take N and V for example they also did a lot of murder of both humans and drones while working for the solver. While V didn't physically hurt N, as far as we know, she still did mistreat him. You can argue that it was to a lesser extent than what J did, but even if it wasn't as bad, it still wasn't good either All three of them were made to do horrific things while working under the absolute solver. But we only get to see how N and V change when free from that

N's change is pretty quick He didn't remember the solver at the time of the pilot, so he didn't have to consider the possible consequences of going against an eldritch space demon that has already eliminated at least 1 planet

V on the other hand did remember and as a result takes longer to change In episodes 2 and 3 we see she's still intent on killing the worker drones and tries to convince N to do the same. She asks him to stop looking into the solver and goes to the prom planning to kill everyone there. V can remember the deal she made with the solver, and she knows it's out there. She can't start slacking off just because J is gone, it could show up at any point and there would be consequences for both her and N In episode 4 we see this fear first hand. V sees Uzi is getting taken over by the solver and attempts to kill her. She justifies this to N by saying that if they do their jobs, that thing (the solver) will leave them alone. She is killing in order to protect herself and N from the solver

This is the exact same justification J gives to V in the finale. She justifies siding with the absolute solver because she believes there's no way to escape or defeat it. There's no escape even in death, so it's pointless to disobey it. Had J come back sooner and had a similar encounter with V in episode 2 or 3, maybe even 4. It's possible that V would have agreed with J back then

But when they do fight in episode 8, V now believes it's possible to overcome the solver and as a result rejects J's offer to join the "winning team". Cementing her evolution to a heroic character

J on the other hand has not had the chance to have that growth. While N and V had the chance to be free from the solver for a while. J spent that entire time by its side. J isn't free from it till CYN's core is destroyed

so, would J choose to better herself now that there's no obligation to please a violent master that will kill her for stepping out of line?

well we can't say for sure we can speculate, of course. There's certainly signs and evidence that she has the capacity for it, but we can't see if that change takes place. If it happens, it happens post canon

I personally believe she could if given enough time and the room to atone by the other drones.

But she could just as easily be rejected by the other drones and be left alone to stew and grow resentful

Maybe they try to let her in, but she ends up being unwilling to change and instead isolates herself. Be it because of ego or a fear of diverting from the life she's lived for so many years

How J turns out after the credits roll is left to interpretation. It's hard to call her bad when we take her situation into account and see the potential for growth. But it's also hard to call her good when we don't know for sure what happens

Rb and all that jazz

[alexanderwales]

I'm curious why you keep calling Blake Snyder a hack writer? You said you noticed it while reading the introduction, what was it that tipped you off?

Part of it is just the ethos. He wants to make mass market stuff that appeals to the lowest common denominator. Part of it is the carnival-barker style. I think there's talent in being a successful hack, and certainly hard work, but ... let me see if I can find a quote.

I think there is something terrribly arrogant about many filmmakers who create movies to “make people think.” People can do their own thinking thanks.

(This isn't from the book, but from a response to a fan asking him why he repeatedly bashed Memento, and this is such an encapsulation of his mindset.)

There is, in the book, no sense of exploration or experimentation, it's always the cheapest, laziest way of solving the writing problem. He disdains art, and his idea of craft is this soulless application of formula. Obviously Save the Cat! is by-the-numbers, but most of the examples inside it are also by-the-numbers, the ways that he suggests to spice up a scene, the things he thinks are funny, his idea of a primal urge.

If we look at the things he's actually written, then he's only had two movies produced, and I've only seen one of them, which was Blank Check. I saw it when I was the correct age for it (a young kid), and it is almost exactly what you would picture when I tell you the logline is "a kid cashes a check for a million dollars", aside from maybe the subplot of criminals wanting their money back, and the weird part at the end where a 30-year-old FBI agent kisses an 11-year-old boy. There is nothing original in it.

And this is what Blake Snyder wants! He has a whole chapter titled "Give me the same thing ... only different!", he thinks that this is what audiences crave, and I don't think he's necessarily wrong, but his ambition starts and ends at "make money selling scripts", and his path to doing that is writing the same story.

Maybe I should sit down and watch Stop of My Mom Will Shoot!, his only other produced script, but it won a Golden Raspberry for Worst Screenplay, so I expect that to be a waste of my time.

Though I think he's a hack, I don't dispute that his methods work, and I don't think that using them precludes a good screenplay, or applied to other writing, precludes good stories. Some of the advice is advice that I've given in the past. I'm also a fan of story structures and think that they can provide a better understanding of the beats of a story and how it's flowing.

"Hack" is, I'll admit, kind of a rude thing to call someone, but if "hack writer" means anything, then Blake Snyder is a hack's hack, with no pretensions of being anything more. And he died fifteen years ago, so it's not like he can get mad about it.

[lovvelorrn]

oh my god…. the grip the great (tv show) has on me…… unexpected + incredibly welcome

[lord-squiggletits]

I need to reread the comics again to have specific arguments/evidence for this, but like

I feel a bit like I could've been sympathetic to the way other Cybertronian colonies view Cybertron, if it weren't for the fact that at least several of them (as in, ones that get notable dialogue/screen time) are so low-key self-righteous?

Like, idk... there's a lot of criticism of Cybertronians because they're so "warlike" and how their obsession with violence and vengeance is just dragging the whole galaxy down with them, but uh. The Autobot-Decepticon war was basically a product of societal ills bubbling over for like 6 million years beforehand and then finally boiling over into a 4 million year war that lasted as long as it did because the people involved had immense social/psychological trauma from being "raised" in an oppressive society.

So when the colonists come in being all 'omg you people are so violent and uncivilized why don't you just like, stop fighting' it kind of pissed me off a little bit as a reader/person like. Idk the colonists really came into this society of people full of massive amounts of trauma where even before the war society was super oppressive and no one has any experience of living "normal" lives unaffected by violence and bigotry. And the colonists were like "ummm wow why don't you guys just??? stop fighting???." Like idk it wasn't EVERY SINGLE MOMENT, in fact I think that when it was played for laughs it's quite a funny "fridge horror" type element. It was just annoying because like.... IDK???? It's just really annoying to watch a bunch of people who lived relatively sheltered lives on their own planets come to a different planet full of traumatized people and be like "omg why are you people so fucked up" IDK BRO MAYBE BECAUSE THEIR SOCIETY WAS OPPRESSIVE AND THEY LIVED THROUGH A LIFELONG WAR???

It also doesn't help that the colonies were literally founded based on imperialism and conquest so like, it's fucking rich to hear colonists scolding Cybertronians for their violence ruining the whole galaxy while literally sitting on planets that their Primes colonized from others. The hypocrisy of this is briefly mentioned in Unicron (literally the FINAL STORY OF THE SERIES) but like, that's basically the only time Cybertronian characters are given a reprieve of sympathy from other characters in universe and it's so tiresome.

I've talked to other people who didn't like the colonists and thought they basically (narratively speaking) existed just to shit on the existing characters, and it's actually really easy for me to sympathize with/outright agree with that assessment of the story considering how much of exRID/OP seems to be preoccupied with "Cybertron/the Primes/Optimus sucks" with very few reprieves for anything positive happening and even fewer chances for characters to get to explain themselves and experience a little bit of justice? Like, as the audience, it's just very frustrating to see the characters you spent hundreds of issues keeping up with get shit on by a bunch of "literally-who"s and then not really get a chance to ever defend themselves, either by literally defending themselves in conversation or having some sort of narrative thing happening that vindicates them at least symbolically