#Homo Ludens

[huayno]

The player who trespasses against the rules or ignores them is a “spoil-sport”. The spoil-sport is not the same as the false player, the cheat; for the latter pretends to be playing the game and, on the face of it, still acknowledges the magic circle. It is curious to note how much more lenient society is to the cheat than to the spoil-sport. This is because the spoil-sport shatters the play-world itself. By withdrawing from the game he reveals the relativity and fragility of the play-world in which he had temporarily shut himself with others. He robs play of its illusion—a pregnant word which means literally “in-play” (from inlusio, illudere or inludere). Therefore he must be cast out, for he threatens the existence of the play-community.

Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture, Johan Huizinga

[plpe01]

Death Stranding Concept Art

[platonicallyinlove]

homo ludens.

[codswallopia]

276 days until submission

Golden rays of sunlight = I get to skip vitamin D supplementation today.

I betrayed my secret to making pizza dough exquisite (mix tipo 00 flour with wholewheat 9:1) which provoked an unexpected reaction ('so that's why your pizza always tastes like B R E A D')

Also, it's NYE today but I feel to old to stay awake 'til midnight.

[rcvandenboogaard]

Christendom en cultuurverval: Huizinga's omstreden kritiek op de geest der eeuw

Reformatorische christenen spelen niet langer een grote rol in het Nederlandse culturele en intellectuele leven. Dat is wat merkwaardig, als je goed nagaat. Ons land, en daarmee onze Nederlandse cultuur zijn immers in niet onbelangrijke mate gegrondvest op een mede door de Reformatie geïnspireerde Opstand tegen Spanje aan het einde van de zestiende eeuw. Of die Opstand nu voornamelijk religieus…

[belkidebirharfimben]

Şu bendeki homo ludenslik homo sapiensliği döver

Anlamda bir sihir var. Nesnelere yüklediğimiz mana onlardan nasıl etkileneceğimizi de şekillendiriyor. Sözgelimi: Dostumun enseme attığı tokatla düşmanımın attığı bir değil. Tamam. Fiil düzeyinde ikisi de aynı. (Tokat nihayetinde tokat yani.) Fakat içimde nasıl bir dalga oluşturacaklarını yine 'anlam' belirliyor. Sevdiğimin tokadını iltifat olarak görebilirim. En sıkkın anında canımın gülümseyebilirim. Düşmanımın attığınaysa böyle bakamam. Olumlayamam. Müsbete yoramam. Dolayısıyla enfüsümdeki yansıması başkadır. Birisi yaralarımdan kurtarır. Ötekisi yaralar. İzleri hep kalır. Karşılığını versem bile zararını uzaklaştıramam. "Nasıl yapar!" itirazı yeşerip durur hatırımda. "Nasıl yapar!" Çünkü yapılamazlığını kesin bir anlam olarak belirlemişimdir. "O adam bana bu tokadı atamaz." Lakin sevdiceğim kulağımı dahi çekebilir. Tıpkı rahmetli babamın defaatle yaptığı gibi... Her hatırlayışımda gülümserim onunla. Özlerim. Acısını dahi özleriz sevdiklerimizin. Çünkü sevdiklerimizdir.

İbrahim sûresinde, kısacık bir mealiyle, şöyle buyruluyor: "Görmedin mi, Allah güzel sözü güzel bir ağaca benzetti ki, kökü sabit, dallarıysa semâdadır. O ağaç, Rabbinin izniyle, her an meyvesini verir. Öğüt alsınlar diye insanlara Allah böyle misaller veriyor. Kötü sözün haliyse, toprağın üstünden sökülmüş kötü bir ağaca benzer ki, kökü de yoktur..." Müfessirlerimiz, ayette geçen 'tayyib kelime/güzel söz' ifadesinin tevhide, 'habis kelime/kötü söz' ifadesininse şirke dair olduğunu haber veriyorlar. Hakikaten imanımızı hayatta aynen böyle buluyoruz. İman, elhamdülillah, durduğu yerde durmuyor. İnsan toprağına atıldığı anda bütün algılarını etkileyecek şekilde yeşeriyor, dallanıyor, meyveleniyor. Allah'ı nasıl bildiğimizle dünyamız da değişiyor, güzelleşiyor. Herşeyi Rahman'ın yarattığına imanlılar, Yunus Emre Hazretleri gibi "Kahrın da hoş, lütfun da hoş..." diyebiliyorlar. Veya İbrahim Hakkı Hazretleri gibi  "Mevlam görelim neyler, neylerse güzel eyler..." söyleyebiliyorlar. Çünkü Onu tanıyınca sevmemek asla mümkün olmuyor. O sevgi de her yaşattığını 'sevgilinin iltifatına' dönüştürüyor. Lezzetlendiriyor.

Mürşidim de bu sadedde diyor: "Kat'iyen bil ki, hilkatin en yüksek gayesi ve fıtratın en yüce neticesi, iman-ı billâhtır. Ve insaniyetin en âli mertebesi ve beşeriyetin en büyük makamı, iman-ı billâh içindeki marifetullahtır. Cin ve insin en parlak saadeti ve en tatlı nimeti, o marifetullah içindeki muhabbetullahtır. Ve ruh-u beşer için en hâlis sürur ve kalb-i insan için en sâfi sevinç, o muhabbetullah içindeki lezzet-i ruhaniyedir. Evet, bütün hakikî saadet ve hâlis sürur ve şirin nimet ve sâfi lezzet, elbette marifetullah ve muhabbetullahtadır. Onlar onsuz olamaz. Cenâb-ı Hakkı tanıyan ve seven, nihayetsiz saadete, nimete, envâra, esrara, ya bilkuvve veya bilfiil mazhardır. Onu hakikî tanımayan, sevmeyen, nihayetsiz şekavete, âlâma ve evhama mânen ve maddeten müptelâ olur..."

Sanki şu dünyaya 'anlamlar yüklemeye' gelmişiz arkadaşım. Yorumlamaya gelmişiz. Okumaya gelmişiz. Ve Hak Teala, yüklediğimiz anlamlara göre, ahiretimizi yaratacak. Yine mürşidimin ifadesiyle: "Burada meyve yersin, orada 'elhamdülillah' yersin." Bu dünyada elhamdülillah diyenler ahirette o elhamdülillahlarını vücudlanmış görecekler demek ki. Buradaki anlamlarıyla orada yeşerecekler. Evet. Cehennem ehli cehenneme layık adem/yokluk anlamları yüklemekte dünyaya. Cennet ehli de cennete yaraşır vücud/varlık anlamları vermektedir yaşadıklarına. Bunlar dünya imtihanımız üzerinden üretilip arşivlenmektedir. Farkındalığımız bir tür kurgu-kayıt hizmeti sunmaktadır. Peki sonrasında ne olacaktır?

Sonra bunlar vücud âlemine tekrar çıkarılacak. Maneviyatlar maddiyata dönüşecek. İlimler hakikate kalbolacak. Herkes odununu kendisi götürecek cehennemine. (Allah bizi onlardan olmaktan korusun.) Herkes nurunu elleriyle taşıyacak cennetine. (Allah bize onlardan olmayı nasip eylesin.) Tıpkı Pir Sultan Abdal'ın dediği gibi: "Cehennem dediğin dal-odun yoktur./Herkes ateşini kendin götürür."

İşte, arkadaşım, bu zaviyeden bakıldığında 'dünya hayat' bir 'oyun ve oyalanmaya' dönüşür gerçekten. Çünkü oyunlar böyle oynanır. Onlar bile-isteye kandırmacalardır. Çocuklar 'yalnız oyuncular için geçerli' anlamlar verebilirler nesnelere. Mesela: Bazen, tıpkı yeğenim Salih'in yaptığı gibi, toplar gezegenlere dönüşebilir. Bazen oyuncak ayı küçük kardeş olabilir. Bazense içinde hiçbirşey olmayan tencerelerde yemekler pişirebilirler. Hayalleri hem gerçektir hem değildir. Gerçektir, zira oyuncuları aksine inandıramazsınız. Değildir, zira hakikate vâkıf olanlar için gülünçtür. Sırr-ı imtihan da bizi böylesi bir 'çoklu gerçeklik dünyasına' uğratmıştır. Bin türlü şirk sanrısına bedel tevhidin de billurdan binbir türlü mertebesi vardır. Herkes mertebesince bir gerçeklikle muhatap olur. Herkes makamınca ağırlanır. Çocuklar da, şimdinin hakkını verebilirlerse eğer, büyüdüklerinde arzuladıkları rolleri oynayabilirler.

Johan Huizinga, Homo Ludens (Oyun İnsanı) isimli meşhur eserinde der ki: "Oyunu kabul etmek, ister istemez, ruhu da kabul etmek demektir. Çünkü özü ne olursa olsun, oyun, madde değildir. Hayvanlar âleminde bile oyun fiziksel varoluşun sınırlarını aşmaktadır. Dünyanın bütünüyle kör güçler tarafından yönetildiğini savunan bir dünya görüşünün perspektifinden baktığımızda oyun tamamen gereksizdir. Ancak ve ancak ruhun içeriye akışının 'evrenin mutlak determinizmini parçalamasıyla' oyun mümkün, tasavvur edilebilir ve anlaşılabilir olur. Oyunun varlığı evren içindeki konumumuzun mantıküstü doğasını sürekli doğrular. Hayvanlar oyun oynayabildiği için salt mekanik varlıklar olmanın ötesindedirler. Biz de oynuyoruz. Ve oynadığımızın bilincindeyiz. Öyleyse biz de salt akıllı varlıklar olmanın ötesindeyiz. Çünkü oyun irrasyoneldir." Kitabın sonlarına doğruysa şöyle güzel bir pencereye çevirir yüzümüzü: "İnsan zihni oyunun büyülü çemberinden ancak gözlerini yüce varlığa çevirerek kurtulabilir. Mantıksal düşünce pek uzağa gidemez. İnsan zihninin bütün hazinelerine ve tüm o parlak başarılarına baktığımızda şunu görüyoruz: Her ciddi akıl yürütmenin dibinde sorunlu bir tortu kalmaktadır. Yargılarımızın hiçbirinin nihai nitelikte olmadığını içten içe biliyoruz. Yargımızın sendelemeye başladığı bu noktada dünyanın ciddi olduğu hissi de sarsılmaya başlar. 'Herşey gelip geçici...' diyen eskilerin sözünün yerine daha olumlu 'Herşey oyun!' sözü kendini bize dayatır..."

"Dünya hayat bir oyun ve oyalanmadan başka birşey değildir..." buyuran En'am sûresi 'oyunun mahiyeti' üzerine düşünmeye sevkediyor bizleri. Dikkat kesilelim. Hem de çok dikkat. Kur'an-ı Mucizü'l-Beyan seçtiği kelimelerle daha nice sırlara işaret ediyor olabilir. O sırları aydınlatmaksa ancak ameliyat-ı tefekküriye ile mümkündür. Tefekkür de temel anlamları doğru yüklemekle ancak bağışlanan bir yoldur. Daha önce okuyanları okumalıyız ki okuyacaklarımızı da okuyabilelim. Daha önce okuyanları okumadan okuyacaklarımızı okuyamayız. Çünkü okumayı öğrenemeyiz. Bizden evvel okuyanların en büyüğüyse "Oku!" emrine muhatap olmuş Aleyhissalatuvesselamdır. O miraçta dahi gözü şaşmayandır. Gördüğünü karıştırmayandır. Hüda kendini bildirmek lütfûndan bizleri esirgemesin. Âmin. Âmin. Âmin.

[sororalice]

Needs Must

Poem written 4-27-23

Between what we must

And what we must not

A slender shoot grows

Viridian, tentative, tender

This fragile life

Exists in the in-betweens

In stolen moments

Dusks and dawns

Yet we are forced

Indebted to the future

To not play

To not pretend

Oh Homo Ludens

How can I see you?

Mazed and gaping

I stand in your wake

[thejaymo]

Worlds Resemble Other Worlds | 2334

Worlds resemble other worlds and we adopt world(view)s when we recognise them. Some worlds we have agency in, others we don’t.  https://www.thejaymo.net/2023/10/20/301-2334-worlds-resemble-other-worlds/

[seva-khusid]

[thevagueambition]

@pilferingapples : Oh I've never heard that term before! Please elaborate if you're up to it? Though I think I get the gist! and YEAH!

The "magic circle" is the space that's create during play/games/etc where rules, as I said, become real because everyone involved agree to act as if they are. The magic circle is maintained by everyone acting according to the rules of the game, e.g. everyone in a game of tag running away from the persuing player, and can be broken when someone acts in a way that runs counter to the rules or to the aesthetics of play -- e.g., in tag, if everyone simply stands there and let themselves be caught, the magic circle is not maintained, and in a board game, if someone flips over the board, they're breaking the magic circle they entered into when they started the game.

The phrase "negotiated play space" is probably what I feel sums it up, at least when using it to describe social situations (eg childhood play, board games, live action roleplaying, tabletop roleplaying, etc). The magic circle maintains the boundaries between the play space and the real world and the magic circle is broken when the real world clashes into the play world. There is also a physically spatial component to it -- the play space, in a physical sense, is deliniated from the 'real world' by e.g. the white lines on a football field and that aids in maintaining the magic circle because during play, those lines take on a special meaning.

There's a somewhat distinct usage of the term regarding digital games that's a bit different and, imo, not as generally useful.

Regardless, the core of it is about how entering the mindset of a game is also what maintains that game and transports you into a different (metaphorical) "space" with specific rules and aesthetics and how acting counter to those things can "break" the magic circle.

(Interestingly, Homo Ludens in itself was actually very much about how play is present in culture very broadly, so as I understand it, it's entirely in line with the origin of the term to interpret it very broadly. It's also pointed out in Homo Ludens that play predates "civilisation" because animals engage in play -- so like, when animals are play fighting and one accidentially hurts another, imo that could also be seen as "breaking" the magic circle to some extent. But I haven't read all of Homo Ludens so I may be talking out my ass lol)

homo ludens' concept of the magic circle is something I wish had become a more generalised common reference point than it has. it's so broadly useful imo.

childhood play and games aren't the only spaces where rules become real because we all agree to act as if they are, there are a lot of social scenarios where that's the case. it's a useful way to conceptualise safe words as well – a safe word either breaks the magic circle or seeks to preserve it while still exerting real world control over the negotiated play space

[bwv572]

I was reading Murray's History of Chess and there was an observation about how the same board games arise independently across multiple countries and cultures and time periods because the mechanics of board games replicate fundamental aspects of the universe.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Egon Schiele, Mother and Child, 1914

* * * * *

 If a serious statement is defined as one that may be made in terms of waking life, poetry will never rise to the level of seriousness. It lies beyond seriousness, on that more primitive and original level where the child, the animal, the savage, and the seer belong, in the region of dream, enchantment, ecstasy, laughter. To understand poetry we must be capable of donning the child’s soul like a magic cloak and of forsaking man’s wisdom for the child’s. 

Johan Huizinga, Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture (via astranemus)

[kenomacreature]

THE MAGIC CIRCLE, or "WTF is Darkness, anyway?"

Part One

A comprehensive, themes-first take on what Deltarune is "really about"

…play is not "ordinary" or "real" life. It is rather a stepping out of "real" life into a temporary sphere of activity with a disposition all of its own. Every child knows perfectly well that he is "only pretending", or that it was "only for fun"…   Nevertheless, […]  the consciousness of play being "only a pretend" does not by any means prevent it from proceeding with the utmost seriousness, with an absorption, a devotion that passes into rapture and, temporarily at least, completely abolishes that troublesome "only" feeling. Any game can at any time wholly run away with the players. The contrast between play and seriousness is always fluid. The inferiority of play is continually being offset by the corresponding superiority of its seriousness. Play turns to seriousness and seriousness to play. Play may rise to heights of beauty and sublimity that leave seriousness far beneath… All play moves and has its being within a playground marked off beforehand either materially or ideally, deliberately or as a matter of course. Just as there is no formal difference between play and ritual, so the "consecrated spot" cannot be formally distinguished from the play-ground. The arena, the card-table, the magic circle, the temple, the stage, the screen, the tennis court, the court of justice, etc., are all in form and function play-grounds, i.e. forbidden spots, isolated, hedged round, hallowed, within which special rules obtain. All are temporary worlds within the ordinary world, dedicated to the performance of an act apart.

J. Huizinga, Homo Ludens, pp. 8-10.  

Introduction: No, really, what is Darkness?

The connective tissue of this rather wide ranging essay lies in its being premised on a two-fold understanding of this omnipresent concept within the narrative of Deltarune – “Darkness” – as not only a crucial plot device governing the supernatural mechanics within the diegesis but also, on a subtextual level, a metaphor for humanity‘s imaginative capacity, specifically the ability to suspend disbelief and temporarily immerse oneself in the internal logic of fictional narratives. Darkness is in essence a literalization of the concept of the “the magic circle”, described in the excerpt above from Dutch theorist Johan Huizinga’s seminal work of cultural theory, Homo Ludens.

There is extremely strong support for this thematic interpretation of Darkness. Not only does the actual content of the two currently released chapters of Deltarune make repeated and explicit comparisons between Dark Worlds and roleplaying games, along with Dark Worlds being deeply steeped in the tropes of fantasy fiction in general, but this metaphor is also embedded into the very form of the game. Whenever a Dark World is entered, Deltarune transforms from an experience of minimal gameplay into a fairly traditional roleplaying video game, complete with battle, party and save systems.

Within the story, Dark Worlds function almost identically to some of the most primitive (narrativized) forms of play among children, literally animating toys and other objects to life. The Lightners then exhibit similarly contradictory behavior vis-a-vis Dark Worlds as humans do when entering the “magic circle” – prepared to take whatever transpires within it very earnestly, and quick to rationalize and adjust to almost anything regardless of how "unnatural" it might seem. If the going ever gets too rough within the Dark World, however, the Lightners are prone to reminding themselves of the subordinate position of what they’re experiencing to “reality”, and indeed, once the Fountains are sealed and the Dark Worlds exited, objects which had come to life turn inanimate again, and the Lightners quickly find themselves reverting to the logic of everyday life.

Most frequently the separation between these worlds is expressed through a comparison between the Dark Worlds and dreams, a constantly recurring motif throughout the first two chapters. Dreams themselves – as phenomena where human beings tend to stop detecting unreality, operating earnestly within the bounds of a “constructed” world – have a long history of being compared to fiction, especially with the advent of more vividly visual-temporal mediums like films and video games.

The opening stanza of Cecil Day Lewis's poem "Newsreel" is illustrative:

Enter the dream-house, brothers and sisters, leaving Your debts asleep, your history at the door: This is the home for heroes, and this loving Darkness a fur you can afford.

I believe this understanding of Darkness to lie at the thematic core of Deltarune, informing almost every other narrative thread contained within it. With that in mind, the goal of this essay is to investigate and make sense of the first two chapters of the game, answering some of the biggest questions posed by the narrative thus far, and speculating about what direction it might be heading in, all while orbiting around this central metaphor of Darkness as the power of creative expression.

First on the agenda is perhaps the most hotly debated topic in the community: the question of the Knight.

Finding the Knight

If our goal is to discover who the Knight might be, it behooves us to establish a rudimentary profile of the kind of person we’re looking for. This is a relatively simple task, as the information we have about the Knight is rather limited and can be reduced to a couple of key points.

1. The Knight creates Dark Fountains.

The most important knowledge we have about the Knight, by far – their primary distinguishing feature – is that they are in the business of creating Dark Fountains. It is among the first concrete pieces of info we learn about the character during their formal introduction by King in Chapter 1, and what primarily foregrounds our understanding of them. If we want to find the Knight, we need to look for someone we have cause to believe is going around creating Dark Fountains in the Light World.

2. The Knight is already familiar with the mechanics of Dark Worlds.

The second most important thing we know about the Knight is related to the first: they specifically created the Dark Fountains of Chapter 1 and 2. This can be intuited from King’s words in Chapter 1, and Queen confirms it outright. This fact has important consequences: if the Knight created the Dark Worlds of Chapter 1 and 2, they must have known how to do so before anyone from those Dark Worlds told them. To find the Knight, we should be on the lookout for someone we have reason to believe already knows about the mechanics of Dark Worlds before the events of the game.

3. The Knight wields a bladed instrument, specifically a knife.

Queen says in no uncertain terms that the Knight used a blade to create the Library Fountain. She then generates an illustrative diagram showing a knife. We are looking for someone who wields knives and uses them to create Dark Fountains.

4. Darkners tend to believe the Knight wants to cause the Roaring.

Though King and Queen don’t actually seem to know the specifics of what the Roaring entails, they both believe that the Knight wants to blanket the Light World in Darkness. Queen, however, explicitly says that she was only assuming this based on the Knight’s actions, strongly implying she hasn’t even met or talked with the Knight. King, for his part, appeals to the Knight’s “will”, which he similarly believes himself to know. It’s not immediately clear why King and Queen believe so strongly that this is the Knight’s plan, beyond potentially assuming it from the mere fact that they are creating Fountains in the Light World. It’s relevant information, no doubt, but not quite as concrete as the other points. Still, at the very least we seem to be looking for someone rash enough to risk the potential end of the world for their goals, if that isn’t their goal to begin with.

We know some other small things about the Knight; Jevil and Spamton are familiar with them in some way (as are many other Darkners), and we have some ominous remarks about communion and hell’s roar and shadows in their hand, but ultimately these are too ambiguous to make much of.

Having erected these four key points, we can now ask ourselves: do they apply to any character in Deltarune?

Well, yeah, as it turns out, there is a character who fits every single criterion listed above. This makes them, to put it bluntly, an incredibly compelling suspect. No prizes for guessing this one: it’s Kris.

What, were you expecting a mystery?

Before going any further, I need to say that when it comes to arguing for Kris being the Knight in this essay, I will be concerning myself almost exclusively with making a positive case for it. Which is to say that this is not a “defense” of Kris Knight, but rather my formulation of it. I won’t be bringing up any common counterarguments (though some of them will be organically refuted over the course of this essay), in part because I want readers to engage with the writing on its own terms, instead of it getting bogged down in the tedious Knight discourse that has consumed the community for the past few years. However, I’m aware of what a controversial point this is, and that there are those in the community who consider Kris to be a total non-starter as a candidate - all I can do is hope that those readers extend me enough grace to entertain the ideas I present here with an open mind.

To get the obvious out of the way, the main piece of evidence for Kris being the Knight is the fact that we see them create a Dark Fountain on screen outright. This immediately fulfills our first criterion: Kris is someone who is willing and able to create Dark Fountains.

Next we must ask ourselves whether it’s possible that Kris created the fountains of Chapter 1 and 2 and was thus already familiar with the mechanics of Dark World creation before the events of the game; as it turns out, this is not only possible but exceedingly likely.

This is because between Chapter 1 and 2, during a time in which Kris’s actions are ominously unaccounted for, we know that the TV is plugged back in after ages of not seeing any use, and that Toriel’s butterscotch pie is eaten by Kris: two things which directly lead to the Fountain creation at the end of Chapter 2 – the need to bake a new pie provides a distraction for Kris to slash Toriel’s tires, forcing Susie to stay over and pushing Toriel to call the police, and the TV is chosen by Kris as the focal point of the Chapter 3 Dark World. Moreover, ominous narration such as (It is not yet time to wash your hands.) if you try to do so at the beginning of the chapter, the general narrative continuity between the ending scenes of Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, and the fact that Kris makes specific arrangements to the rooms like turning on the TV (similar to how the laptop was turned on before the Library Fountain was created) and opening the door, all seem to point to the Fountain being premeditated, which would necessarily mean that their knowledge of Dark Worlds precedes the game’s opening. It should also be uncontroversial to acknowledge that not only does Kris wield a knife to create the Dark World of Chapter 3 (the same knife they brandish at the end of Chapter 1), but they're heavily associated with knives in general, with even their name – "kris" – being the name of a distinctive dagger. It's hard to imagine any other character fitting the third criterion so perfectly.

Finally, though we are no closer (for the moment) to understanding why King and Queen were so confident about the Knight’s intentions, it can absolutely be shown that Kris is rash enough to, at the very least, risk the end of the world: they already know about the danger of the Roaring from Ralsei, but it doesn’t stop them from creating a Dark World. If they aren’t the Knight, they are arguably behaving even more rashly; it would mean that they are knowingly contributing to more Dark Worlds being created while there’s someone already going around creating them, massively increasing the risk of the Roaring. Kris even creates a Fountain on the Weird Route, despite experiencing firsthand the very real threat that Dark Worlds can pose to Lightners who venture into them. All in all, the Fountain creation at the end of Chapter 2 serves as more than enough evidence of Kris behaving in an extremely reckless and potentially morally questionable fashion. It’s perhaps not impossible to understand why King and Queen assumed that they are trying to cause the Roaring on purpose.

Of equal importance to the above evidence is the fact that Kris being the Knight is a perfect fit for Deltarune’s themes, which encompass topics like escapism, agency, freedom and the power of fiction. As one might expect from a well-constructed narrative, these are all relevant to Kris, the protagonist of the story, and these connections are only strengthened if Kris does turn out to be the Knight.

As stated earlier, the Dark Worlds are a relatively unsubtle metaphor for fictional creation and roleplaying. They are dream-like fantasy worlds where good guys band together and go on adventures to stop the bad guys. If Kris is the Knight, that means they are essentially authoring these metaphorical fictional worlds, serving something of a dungeon master role where they literally create the settings, obstacles and conflicts to overcome, and then guide the stories of those conflicts to their resolutions; not only by accompanying the player and Susie on their hero's journeys, but also through Ralsei, the party's guide, tasked with keeping the adventure "on rails" so to speak (evidence strongly points to Ralsei, who is likely Kris's horned headband that goes missing some time before the events of the story, being in cahoots with Kris – watch Black Chestnut's wonderful "Ultimate Ralsei Theory" for more on this). From this perspective, “the Knight” is rather more like a persona that Kris adopts when necessary, no more reflective of their real personality than the prophetic hero role they assume when we take control of them.

Think back to them slashing the tires and opening the door at the end of Chapter 2; the mythology of the Knight is practically being built in real time – "this dastardly Knight is now targetting our Lightners, going so far as to break into their homes!" – it's almost a comic analogue to Deltarune theories which take the character at face value, such as the one positing that the Knight hid in the closet of the Library before ambushing Noelle and Berdly. And one gets the feeling Kris treats this all as separate from themselves. Just think of how into the performance they get; big flashy gestures, red eyes, knives – the Roaring Knight is essentially an anime villain! But Kris isn't any less invested in their role as the hero of prophecy, either. And this seems to reflect what we know of Kris’s Light World personality; we’re told that they’re mischievous, and sometimes take their pranks too far, but we also get indications that they have a kind-hearted disposition and like to help people out. Symbolically, these dual aspects of Kris’s personality are intensified in their Delta Warrior and Roaring Knight personas.

This ties into the theme of escapism; we see that the Dark Worlds serve an important role for the Lightners who venture into them. They provide the troubled teenagers with hope, entertainment, reprieve from their troubles, self-confidence, a medium of connection with others, and a way to reflect on their lives and provide it with meaning. At the same time, they risk being consumed by the allure of that unreality, embodied in the Weird Route’s erratic, obsessive actions that put the Lighters in danger (itself indicative of the player getting "too invested" in the game), and of course with the Roaring itself, which happens when Dark – the domain of fiction – overpowers Light, the domain of reality. If Kris is the Knight, it at the very least highlights the danger of their commitment to the Darkness, especially in light of the fact that Kris creates the next Fountain regardless of whether Berdly dies or not, even if we don't yet have a clear picture of their intentions or whether they have a good reason for their troubling actions.

Kris is at the epicenter of the themes of agency and freedom in Deltarune, mainly explored in the memorable chapter endings where Kris rips out their player-controlled heart to do things without our prompting, and in the quests of the secret bosses where the ongoing motif is a confrontation with the characters’ own static existence, their lack of agency as lines of code in a video game, forced to play a particular role – especially apparent in the quest of Spamton, whose similarities to Kris lead to them becoming quite visibly distraught by the end. This is true irrespective of Kris being the Knight, but one can't help but notice how well that development plays into the established divide between the player and the protagonist; if Kris is the Knight, that would sharpen the contradictions even more and mean that where we control Kris as the protagonist, they also act as our antagonist when they disconnect from us, creating the Dark Worlds we later have to seal. This separates Kris’s character even more from our control of them and their function as our player avatar, blurring the lines between who's "really in control" of the story.

Earlier we went over the strong textual evidence for Kris being the Knight, but sometimes we might have reasons to be skeptical about a seemingly obvious conclusion if it conflicts with the mode of storytelling or thematic framework of a narrative. That is not the case here; at the very least Kris being the Knight does not conflict with any of the core themes of the story. I'd go much further, though, and say that it massively deepens and adds layers to those themes. It’s a decision the story would only benefit from.

There are many questions that remain. The Darkners seem to be quite familiar with the Knight, but we know that Kris couldn’t have entered the Fountains and made themselves known, because that would mean the Darkners would've immediately recognized Kris as the Knight when we later inhabit them. We actually don’t even know if it’s possible to enter the Dark Fountains without sealing them in the first place; Ralsei and Lancer make it sound like you can’t in Chapter 1.

Though we have a satisfying enough answer to who’s responsible for the Dark Worlds, we don’t yet have a great understanding of the internal dynamics of those worlds. How could it be that the Darkners know about the Knight without ever having met them? This is something we must inquire into.

To be continued in Part Two.

[sofruiti]

SORRY OP! Stick Adventure doesn't have what's called a Magic Circle where the players buy into the rule set for the express purpose of having fun, therefore it's not a game. Your extremely bad faith example of an RPG is not a valid criticism of DND 5E in the literal sense because you've failed to show that you understand the issues with the source material. YOU LOSE. CONTINUE?

im confused about the dnd 5e hatred. yall arent just ignoring rules that are dumb? ur dm actually follows every single thing in the book for real?

if you have to ignore some of the rules for the game to be good then the game is not good

[historicboii]

Okay finally using my degree and giving you some deep analysis, i give you all

THE PACIFIC AS CHAIRS

Part 1

Okay starting with Leckie, i have the Mies chair, basically in Italy in the 70s/80s many design firms were breaking the stablished design norms. in this design they take the principles of geometry of mies van de rohen of to the extreme. Fits Leckies vibe of studious and a bit of a prick.

Next up we have Runner, he gets the chair for the café museum by Adolf loos, very practical but also beautiful. Simple in its lines but very reliable, i think It fits his persona

Now Chuckler gets the Panton chair, its confortable, its light, its playful. It was one of the first plastic chairs made by inyection and is a staple of design in general. I think It fits his bright personality

Now Hoosier, you guys know how much i love hoosier, he gets the Pantower. Panton believed in the homo ludens, basically the freedom of movement of man. The Pantower allowed for a wide range of poses allowing him to sit or sleep or even play with his dog.

Finally Sid Phillips, im choosing the Grande confort chair by Le corbusier and Charlotte perriand, its supposed to be ergonomic and luxurious. Le corbusier started the modular House, and sid is the first marine we see retourn to that ideal home, so i think it fits .

[garadinervi]

herman de vries, Kollage met letters (tekst uit "Homo Ludens" van J. M. Huizinga) (V 1966-15), 1966 [Kunstmuseum Den Haag. © herman de vries]