#Honestly I'm not too opposed to trying to flesh this out its just that the only cookies I've truly cared about

[seafoam-taide]

Further sketching followup of this post . Realized that Croissant in this situation should absolutely have lost an eye bc duh . Also she just looks too weird with long sleeves so weird vest thing go. And I wanted to try to stick to something close to Loop with tk but I had to give them pants the pants are too important to the tk shape. Sorry

[unleashthegoats]

Hey y'all! Loved the new episode, and wanted to chip in on one of the later points - videogames, especially in relation to the "Grey" Jedi concept. Knights of the Old Republic II really did some irreversible damage in that regard, as much as I love the game (though I prefer the first one). Kreia is one of the most central characters in regard to shifting morality debates in Star Wars (in universe and from fans alike) imo, and I'd honestly be super interested in hearing you three cover either or both of the games in the podcast, although I understand that's highly unlikely since none of you have played them. But she is extremely relevant to this topic because she preaches about neutrality and that there's more than just ~dogmatic thinkings of light and dark~, and your relationship with her suffers if you are kind and altruistic and get too rooted in the light side and she's like...one of *the* characters that kind of gets credited with developing a "grey" philosophy in-universe? But people always bring her up as if she's this great point of sensible consideration and not actually, as it turns out, a master manipulator trying to purge the Force from the galaxy (or something like that at least? It's been a while since my last playthrough lol) that lies to you all the time to get you to do what she wants (because she was so crazy bananas both the Jedi and the Sith said "no thank u :)" - well, with a bit more nuance but you get the gist). Really, it's a bit like people falling for Palpatine's anti-Jedi points all over how they talk about her philosophic arguments without bringing that up. But yeah, I thought you might be interested in that. Also, I think KotOR might be what people meant with being able to unlock Dark Side powers as a Light sider but you are absolutely correct that it's a mechanics vs story issue (especially since some powers are indeed alignment-locked AND making dark side choices does impact the character (apart from story, ending and relationships to your party members). It's a bit of a simplistic gimmick, of course, but the further you get into the Dark Side on the alignment, the more it's visible - sickly skin colour, cracks in the skin and flesh, your eyes change...stuff like that. I don't think using Dark Side powers actually pushes you further down the alignment, but the intent is obviously not for Light Siders to mix and match however they like).

Anyway, I'm so sorry for rambling on for so long, but I thought you (or someone, at least :D ) might appreciate that additional info. Keep up the good podcasting! :)

OUR FIRST ASK! I'm so glad you're enjoying the podcast, thank-you so much for listening to us ramble on for an hour once a month!

This is all really interesting! I've read a few metas about the Star Wars video games and the characters within them which is partly why I chose to briefly include them in the episode (and also because I am familiar with Jedi: Survivor which has its own "dark side" mechanic for the main character that was relevant to the discussion). Aside from Jedi: Survivor, I wasn't necessarily referencing any one specific video game, I assume it's probably a thing that's come up more than once.

As far as my reaction to Kreia goes, just based on your description of her, the idea of there being "too much light" just isn't how Lucas's own worldbuilding worked. It's clearly trying to hit on the idea of "balance" being equal amounts of light and dark usage, as opposed to balance being acknowledging darkness EXISTS (in yourself and in the universe) in order to keep yourself from acting on it. There just isn't a way to be "too light" or something like that, there's never "too much" kindness and compassion and selflessness in the world. In this sense, the video games are just going to fall into the same category as the rest of legends and EU stuff, in that they often just do their own thing based on their own interpretations of Star Wars, but it doesn't mean it actually fits with what Lucas himself was trying to get across about the philosophy of the Force and the Jedi in his own stories, and that's primarily what we're using as a base to discuss Star Wars from.

If any of us ends up playing KOTOR, we can certainly try to bring it up more often. I don't think we have any plans of doing more video game stuff currently, but if the KOTOR remake ever comes to pass, maybe I will!

-Mod Sugar

[adobe-outdesign]

What do you think of cubone?

You really can't go wrong with Cubone. A little dinosaur-ish creature wearing a skull makes for an interesting visual and unique theme as-is, but the heartbreaking backstory is what really helps people remember this line, what with the whole "it constantly mourns its dead mother and wears her skull" thing it has going on.

Arguably this backstory doesn't make much sense when applied to the species as a whole, especially when you can obviously breed them without the mother dying, but the powerful imagery associated with this 'mon can't be beat. I think just fleshing out the lore behind it would help it a lot; maybe skulls are passed down through generations when one dies, thus explaining where the Cubones that have mothers get their helmets from.

Backstory aside, the design also looks solid; the skull has a good sense of shape and depth to it (also love the cracks, even if it's a bit weird that they're always in the same place), and a nice, neutral body to compliment it. I wouldn't have minded a bit of a darker brown for contrast, like the above art sports, but otherwise I have no real complaints.

Marowak has some really interesting lore behind it: basically, Cubone's grief makes it stronger, and when it comes to terms with its loss, it evolves:

It kind of adds a nice moral about accepting grief into an otherwise sad story, even if you still have to try not to question the "dead mom" thing too much.

Visually, it does the logical thing and fuses the skull with the head completely. I do kind of question it changing shape, given that it's supposed to be the skull Cubone wears, but it at least looks nice and streamlined.

I guess my one problem with Marowak is that it maybe looks a bit too similar to Cubone? They're not the same, obviously, but it feels like the concept could've been pushed more at this stage. Make it ground/ghost, make the underbelly look like rib markings, add a skeletal tail tip, that kind of thing. Really advance the skeleton motif it has going on.

Another option would've been for Cubone to not carry the bone club until it becomes Marowak, which would've done the same "advancement" idea with drastically changing anything. It's not bad as is or anything; just could've been pushed a bit more.

Thankfully, Alolan Marowak is one of those designs that comes in and does everything the original design doesn't.

First, the dark body and skull markings look great; they compliment the skull well and add some much-needed contrast. Meanwhile, the fire adds some nice pops of color. And not only does this Marowak add fire to the bone it carries, but it also has some great vertebrae markings on its back, going back what I was saying about Marowak pushing its visuals a bit more.

Combine all that with fire/ghost typing and a fire dancing theme going on with the bone, appropriate for the Hawaiian-based region it's from, and you have a pretty perfect regional that's honestly far better than the original in my opinion.

My sole nitpick with it is that for some reason the body way skinnier than on original Marowak, giving it a weird top-heavy appearance for no real reason. Also, while I'm not opposed to cutting pointless regional pre-evos, it does feel weird that regular Cubone drops ground in favor of fire and ghost typing out of nowhere, but that's beside the point.

So overall, Cubone is a adorably pitiful Pokemon with a great theme and solid design. Marowak is fine, but doesn't push its design as much as it could; Alolan Marowak makes up for that with a refreshing take that really breathes some new life into the design. Overall, a very solid line.

Also, final side note: the Gen 1 betas reveal that the theorized connection between Cubone and Kangaskhan was indeed real via a third evolutionary sprite, though exactly what the intention was lore-wise here is left ambiguous. It might have been interesting, but at the same time, I feel like it might've distracted from Cubone's own themes a bit by tossing a baby in there. Too hard to say without knowing the context.

[chess-does-things]

My Little Review of Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves

I'm not exactly a good film reviewer, so pardon my ramblings, but it was SUPER good. A nice blend of action & comedy and it doesn't fall into any really common tropes. I wouldn't say that the plot takes you in very predictable directions, so every plot point felt fresh and unexpected while still feeling connected. While there are quite a few characters to keep track of, all of them are fleshed out just enough; you don't get bogged down in details but you still connect to them as people.

And just the design of the movie! The set designs and costumes (yes, a movie with nonhuman beings that doesn't just cloak the actors in CGI!), it made me feel like I was watching a full-on renaissance faire (which sounds creepy, but it was really immersive). And you can see most of the movie!!!! There's lighting that isn't trying to mask rushed CGI!! And the sound design, it isn't overwhelming or jarring!! YOU CAN CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THE CHARACTERS!!!!

I only have 2 "critiques". Firstly, the film didn't really feel action-oriented enough, although you could argue that's just because we're used to action movies being these mega-blockbusters nowadays, so a more down-to-earth story (as in, one where a single city is threatened as opposed to *literally the entire universe*) doesn't feel as exciting anymore. Second, somehow the film managed to feel *too short*, of all things. We entered the theater at 7:30 and got out around 10, but the film easily feels like it's only an hour long. I don't know what it means when a film manages to 1) not drag out a 3-hour long story, 2) not overwhelm the audience with stimuli for the entirety of its runtime, and 3) feel significantly shorter than it actually is. I would love to see this film become part of a series (just because I'm utterly in love with the world the crew has crafted), but honestly? I think that would just drag out the concept and cheapen the movie over time. Regardless, I would love to see more from these wonderful creators and am quite happy that I got to see this film.

[petrifact]

Write Your First Adventure Lesson 6: Villains and BBEGs

For this lesson, participants were to describe the villain of their adventure, including the following points:

Which conflict the villain represents (Character vs Character, Character vs Self, or Character vs World)

How the villain personifies this conflict

How the villain may succeed

They were also asked to flesh out the villain using what the instructor called the RATS system, determining what makes the villain relatable, antagonistic, threatening, and special.

(Both those three kinds of conflict and the RATS system were of course explained in more detail in the lesson.)

I kind of went overboard on this one and tripled my work. Here's what I wrote:

Hrm… I feel like in my adventure there are really three villains (not counting the spirit trapped in the stone, which I see is more a tool used by the villains). Still, if one of them is the main villain, it would be the magician who trapped the spirit… though I guess it wouldn't hurt to try this activity for all three villains.

One thing I was realizing reading over this, though, is that in my adventure the villains really… aren't necessarily an immediate threat. The cult may be destablizing the area; if it's left to spread unchecked its leaders could get political ambitions and start causing major problems; but at the moment, aside from the murders by the zealot, it's more of a potential threat than an immediate danger. I'm not sure that's a major problem, though; I think I'll address it in a sidebar, that the adventure as written mostly assumes the PCs are going to be suspicious of the cult and try to investigate it, but if they don't, or if they choose not to do anything about it, then it could grow over time and become a long-term "subplot" of the campaign rather than a one-shot.

Anyway, on to the villains.

The Magician:

Okay, this is going to be a little tough, because while she's really the biggest threat and the main instigator here, of the three villainous characters she's the one that I feel like I have the least grasp of, as far as her motives and personality. I'll have to think about this. Why is she doing what she's doing? What does she ultimately hope to accomplish?

Oh… hey… maybe she does have long-term political goals, which she's keeping the nominal cult leader in the dark about. Maybe she thinks Sartar's current leadership is too soft, and wants to return Sartar to an age of glory… or even to a pre-Sartar state. Hm. (By the way, I've been thinking of her as just a "magician" because, honestly, I haven't been totally sure what her deal is as far as the kind of magic she's using. Wait a second… maybe she's a shaman; she's already been serving an ancient Beast Man spirit… nah; if she's trying to imprison one that doesn't fit all that well. Hm, maybe she is a cultist of a spirit, but not a Beast Man spirit; a different ancient spirit that opposed the Beast Men… okay, that could be interesting.)

Okay, so let's start with the magician.

WHAT CONFLICT DOES SHE REPRESENT? I guess of the three she most embodies a Character vs World conflict--it's not that she's directly attacking the PCs or their allies; it's that she's trying to shape society the way she wants it. (If she's confronted directly, though, she could definitely be a Character vs Character conflict.)

HOW DOES SHE PERSONIFY THIS CONFLICT? Her ultimate goal is to gather enough power for the cult for it to be able to dominate the village, and eventually spread to Dragon Pass as a whole. In the meantime, she's helping the cult leader gather a community of followers around him.

HOW COULD SHE SUCCEED? If the cult isn't stopped and its membership keeps increasing it could grow into a major force in Dragon Pass and the magician could turn its cultists into a conquering army -- leaving the cult leader as the figurehead while she pulls the strings.

RATS:

RELATABLE: The magician hopes to return Dragon Pass to an earlier age, when she thinks it was stronger. The fact that the Lunar Empire was able to conquer the land shows how weak its leaders currently are, even if they recently threw off their Lunar occupiers with the convenient help of a dragon. She wants to return Dragon Pass to a time when its people had no need to fear any oppressors. (Such a time may never have wholly existed, but she's convinced it did.)

ANTAGONISTIC: As the cult gets stronger, the surrounding community becomes weaker, as the cultists devote their resources toward the cult of the shard rather than their community. Existing cults of the gods would also consider the cult blasphemous, and its taking focus from them weakens those cults as well. On a more personal level, if one of the PCs' friends or relatives is enmeshed in the cult, the PCs will likely want to extract them.

THREATENING: As mentioned above, the magician and the cult aren't imposing much of an immediate threat… but in the long term they could be a force to be reckoned with as they try to overthrow the established order. More immediately, though, the magician isn't going to like the PCs looking into the cult, and may set the cultists against them—or if pressed may take matters into her own hands and use her magic against them.

SPECIAL: The magician isn't an obvious villain at first, since she's letting the cult leader be the face of the organization. She's obsessed with history, and will talk at length about ancient wars and civilizations if given a chance.

Okay, let's do the other two villains, while I'm at it. The cult leader:

WHAT CONFLICT DOES HE REPRESENT? In a way, he kind of embodies a Character vs Self conflict—he's trying to convince other characters of the truth of his cult, and change their beliefs.

HOW DOES HE PERSONIFY THIS CONFLICT? The cult leader is a charismatic conman who's an expert at manipulating people, and who uses his force of personality to overcome people's doubts in his cult and get them to follow him.

HOW COULD HE SUCCEED? He's already had considerable success in starting the cult, but again, if he's not stopped, he'll grow the cult into a force to be reckoned with. While the cult leader himself doesn't have any real political ambitions, he'll still consider it a success if he's worshipped as a hero by large groups of people… and what they choose to do in his name, well, that's their business.

RATS:

RELATABLE: Ulimately, for all his charm and schmoozery [yeah okay that's not a word sorry], the cult leader really only wants two things: worldly comfort, and people looking up to him. Becoming the leader of a large cult would satisfy both of those goals. Left to himself, he wouldn't do much with his cult other than position himself as its pampered leader, but of course the magician has other plans.

ANTAGONISTIC: He's antagonistic for essentially the same reason as the magician; the PCs are likely to want to stop the growth of the cult. On a more immediate level, though, the cult leader is more likely to confront the PCs personally, at least at first, though that confrontation will be in the form of trying to convert them rather than combat.

THREATENING: Again, the cult leader is threatening for the same reason as the magician—because the cult itself is a threat. Furthermore, his honeyed words and clever speech might get characters to doubt their own convictions…

SPECIAL: The cult leader is well-spoken and likeable, which is much of what makes him so dangerous. He has a taste for the finer things in life, and is reluctant to pass up an exotic meal or some other luxury experience. He's missing his left hand, which he claims to have lost in a battle with a creature of chaos (in reality, it was in an accident as a child, when he was forced to work as a child laborer—an experience which has contributed to his current distaste for any sort of physical labor).

And now the zealot:

WHAT CONFLICT DOES HE REPRESENT? Here finally we have a straightforward Character vs Character conflict. He's killing people.

HOW DOES HE PERSONIFY THIS CONFLICT? The zealot is killing people he sees as threats to the cult. If he realizes the PCs are investigating the cult, they're likely to get added to his hit list.

HOW COULD HE SUCCEED? Well, he could succeed by killing the PCs. Hopefully that won't happen.

RATS:

RELATABLE: He may be murdering people, but he's doing it for what he sees as a good reason. He's a true believer in the cult, completely convinced that the cult leader's fancy rock is a true shard of the Spike, and that anything the cult does is right. Therefore, anyone who opposes the cult is wrong—and must be stopped at all costs.

ANTAGONISTIC: Even before he targets the PCs, the PCs are likely to want to put a stop to the murders. Of course, if they become targets themselves, that's all the more reason to regard him as an antagonist…

THREATENING: The zealot poses a direct threat to the life of those he sees as enemies of the cult—which, again, could easily come to include the PCs.

SPECIAL: The zealot is a former initiate of Humakt, and had the Death rune tattooed on his skin in various places. Since his conversion to the cult of the shard, he's tried to remove or overwrite those tattoos, which has left a mess of scars.

[inber]

A/N: For @limerental, who I believe championed this nonsense idea in the Yennskier server some time ago.

"Yennefer!" Jaskier's voice decimates the meditative peace of the alchemical study, "Gorgeous, indomitable Goddess of my life, wielder of righteous might and--"

"Not that I'm violently opposed to your simpering, Jaskier," Yennefer says, pushing a small pair of spectacles up her freckled nose, "but get to the point today, would you?"

"Erm, right. Yes. The point. By the way, did I tell you how delightfully deadly you look today? Emerald truly is your colour. Hold on, is that hairpin new...?"

"Focus, bard." Yennefer reaches within the well of herself to fetch patience.

"Ah, yes! Right. So, you know that sparkly blue orb in your library you told me not to touch?" Jaskier shifts his weight, one foot to another.

Yennefer takes a breath in. Closes her eyes. "Yes, Jaskier?"

"I touched it."

For a long moment, it seems as though Jaskier might flee after this confession, coltishly a'tremble. The bucket scrapes the bottom of Yennefer’s well.

"And?" She prompts.

"It's... well. It might be easier to show you. Promise you won't be mad?" Jaskier is made of eyes, all gleaming glossy and apologetic, as though this sort of buffoonery isn't a common occurrence.

"I'm already mad."

"Ye-en." Jaskier whines, fidgeting so hard with the hem of his doublet that the stitched seam squeaks in protest. "It was an accident, honestly, swear it--"

"Just show me, Jaskier." Yennefer barks. She removes the magnifying glasses from the perch of her nose. As he scarpers off, Yennefer massages the flesh between her manicured eyebrows and heaves a sigh.

Jaskier promptly returns, with Geralt.

Geralt, who is standing on the bard’s outstretched palm, currently no larger than six inches tall. He's dressed in a makeshift toga, a scrap of golden silk obviously fashioned from Jaskier's wardrobe. The witcher looks thoroughly disgruntled.

"Geralt's, uh. Geralt's small now." Jaskier says, redundantly.

"Huh." Yennefer marvels, squinting at the miniature man. "How curious."

Geralt gesticulates angrily, squeaking. Carefully balancing him in his hand, Jaskier reaches into his own pocket and withdraws a small piece of parchment rolled into a cone. It is offered to Geralt, who snatches it.

"Kill him," Geralt's downsized baritone echoes through the crafted megaphone, "kill the fucking bard, Yen."

"Tempting." Yennefer agrees, grinning ivory-sharp when Jaskier pales. "Won't solve this small issue, though."

"Hilarious." Geralt says, hopping down onto the desk when Jaskier brings him closer.

"We were playing a game of Fire Shoe." Jaskier nibbles his lower lip. Wisely, Yennefer refrains from asking about the intricacies of 'Fire Shoe'. "Geralt threw too high, and I jumped for it, and I sort-of maybe kind-of knocked the orb off its pedestal."

"And then you picked it up to put it back, right?"

"You get mad when we make a mess!" Jaskier defends, "I was trying to be good. But then I turn around and there's a puddle of clothing where Geralt was standing and--"

"Also, we, uh, need new curtains in the library." Geralt adds.

Yennefer glowers at both of them. The two men have the good sense to look ashamed. She flips her book shut.

"This is going to take me awhile to undo." Yennefer says, "And I'm going to need some things from market."

"I can go fetch them!" Jaskier offers, "I'll take Roach. Shan't be too long."

"Roach’s service is for people who aren't colossal Fire Shoe failures!" Geralt bursts, stamping his miniature feet like an incensed duckling.

Yennefer upturns a large jar over Geralt.

"Off you go." She hands Jaskier a list, and waves a vague hand at him. The bard regards Geralt in his crystal prison, shrugs, and then heads out the door.

Geralt's high-pitched tirade is easy enough to drown out. After he aards himself across the length of the jar in a bid for freedom, he sits down and sulks. Yennefer puts her feet up, picks up a novel, and enjoys the peace.

By the time Jaskier returns with the wine and cheese she sent him out for, Geralt’s temporary affliction will have worn off.

[beelspillowpet]

So I'm kinda bullshitting here cause I'm not 100% caught up with the Lessons. But I had this running by my mind still.

We know how the celestial realm (heaven) and devildoom (hell) are very different depicted than in normal bible text and ECT. As in the devildoom already existed before when god created humans and let them wonder the earth. That appearantly is bigger than both the devildoom and maybe the celestial realm as well???

So I was thinking thoughts, what the fuck was god doing BEFORE even having the angels in mind?? Was the devildoom around?? Did presumably the demon king ancestor or himself were just vibing into timeless space and we're like. "Man you kinda borning I'ma make something" ???? Like what kind of relationship even was it before all this stupid division of balance or what not. I feel like they had beef only cause the demon king just wanted to chill or some shit but god was to much of a noisey bitch and puke out some ring floating eyes and call it his sons and the demon king just said fuck no.

AFKJGNKBGJKF THE END OF THIS ASK IS KILLING ME

Honestly with how I’ve written my timeline of events, I see it as the first king of hell to be the brother of god. Not a friend, not any of that shit- but two literal brothers. maybe even twins if you wanna get funky.

For an eternity after their were first brought into the concept of even thinking; they’d been learning about each other. what sort of things would they like to do, what sort of things would they want to try out? and after eons upon eons of just... talking about it, they eventually do it. And so celestia was created. but they have different ideas about how to run things, and a fight ensues. and not too long into it all, did a fight break out and, in similar fashion of lucifer and his brothers, did the “evil” brother (the ancient king maybe?) lose the battle and was cast out, along with those who opposed god.

now the demon king, not having anything to do with his followers, creates a new world. (or maybe his brother created that realm for him to do as he wanted, as they WERE still brothers after all and a simple fight wouldnt completely ruin their relationship) and so now you have hell.

this would probably explain why they arent literally at a war yet, but id like to think that the idea of a war brewing isnt lost on everyone in the current cast?

So when Lucifer comes out and is like yeah no this shit sucks you fucking suck god, throws a tantrum starts a war and then falls again, gods like what the fuck man keep your hands off my angels (bc theres probably more angels than demons?????) the devil is like alright what if we just make a middle ground realm where we have ppl who arent devout to you but also arent out here being literal demons either... and we just watch them and tempt them to come to us or something????

and so the human realm is created. and maybe gods been winning this little “race” or “game” or whatever you wanna call it. maybe gods been getting more and more angels and so the demon king is like well what if i do an exchange program and show humans that the devildom isnt such an awful place???

.... and with that messy rambling out of the way, its my theory that MC is the first of MAAAANY humans to come someday. indoctrination of humans into loving demons and the life of being “evil” just so the demon king can win the favoritism poll.

its a really messy thought bunny ive had for a WHILE but never felt the urge to flesh out. but going over everything from the VEEERY beginning up until now and trying to rationalize or reason for why things happen can be INCREDIBLY interesting provided one has the time...

[impalementation]

I think your take on Doublemeat Palace is interesting because to me it's emblematic of all the things that make Season 6 (particularly the back half after "Tabula Rasa") not work for me. It's relentlessly grim and unpleasant and I can feel the writers twisting the plot to make sure every character is as miserable as possible. I'm not opposed to seeing protagonists in a low point or even outright failing. Season 3 of Game of Thrones is some of my favorite TV ever. (1/2)

(2/2) But at a certain point the grim and gritty, if it's not well written, and broken up with some moments of lightness (like Buffy was previously known for) the audience gets numb. It also doesn't help that no one has any agency. (Magicrack, the not!wedding, Dawn doing zip) Again, I'm not opposed to dark plotlines. I'm opposed to incompetent writing.I don't think you can call an episode or an arc "objectively" good if it doesn't work for the majority of the audience it's been written for. 

 you know, i’m going to disagree about the “grim and gritty” thing. doublemeat palace actually stands out to me as being really funny. and for having a lowkey positive ending. true, the episode is about the soul-sucking prospect of having to do the same dreary work every day. it’s about how much it sometimes sucks to work, which is why you have willow dealing with the fact that recovery is a difficult thing that you have to decide to commit to every day, xander and anya facing the fact that marriage is also a lifelong daily commitment, and buffy taking an unpleasant and mechanical job in order to put food on the table (and the episode plays up that the managers have been doing it for five or ten years). but like, names like “manny the manager”? the weirdo robotic people? the exaggerated camera angles? the swirling cow and chicken? buffy’s constant attempts at jokes? “hot delicious human flesh”? a little old lady with penis monster on her head? this stuff is totally absurdist. i think of doublemeat palace as almost the opposite of episodes like once more with feeling and tabula rasa, where things superficially seem fun but are actually quite dark. doublemeat palace seems superficially unpleasant but actually has a wicked sense of humor. and i say that the ending is positive because it involves both willow and buffy committing to doing work. they’re faced with the opportunity to “cheat” at life like the trio, who steal money instead of having jobs, but ultimately decide to do the right thing. willow doesn’t accept amy’s magic and buffy doesn’t blackmail the company. 

that goes for a lot of season six, in my opinion. even late season six. people say there was less humor, and i think that’s true to an extent, but honestly i think it’s more that the tone of the humor changed. it got more sardonic and absurd, but was definitely still there. eg people think of seeing red as the episode where the two Very Bad Things happened, but outside of those scenes a lot of the episode is like, fascinatingly (to me) slapstick (the whole jetpack bonanza? “say goodnight bitch” “goodnight, bitch”). and has that really lovely conversation between buffy and xander at the end. in general, i think a lot more season six episodes have positive endings than it gets a reputation for. i already mentioned the ending of doublemeat palace. but the end of gone has buffy saying she doesn’t want to die, the end of older and far away has buffy deciding to stay home with dawn, the end of as you were has buffy deciding to break up with spike, and the end of grave has buffy, willow, and spike all making important changes for the better. as in, season six can be very dark, yes. but i would not call it a hopeless or cynical kind of dark. it’s about the characters clawing their way out of that dark place. not just a statement that “adulthood sucks.” you can argue that the season didn’t pull off its attempts at lightness, but i very much think they’re there. 

at any rate, i agree to an extent that if a work of art isn’t working on most people, that’s probably a sign it’s doing something wrong. but i’d offer the counterpoint that you might also say that if a work of art really works on some people, even if not everyone, it’s probably doing something right. as far as the season as a whole goes, i’d actually take issue, on a basic factual level, with the claim that it didn’t work on the majority of people. not to validate IMDB’s ratings for buffy’s episodes, but it does have an n=~2000 sample size and if you average out the ratings by season, season six doesn’t rank starkly lower than any other season. it’s on the less popular side, but it still hovers around an 8.0 average like most of the other seasons. moreover if you go by the big r/buffy polls (n=~120-310), season six ranks in the top three favorite seasons every year they did one (2011: 3 > 6 > 2, 2012: 6 = 3 > 5, 2013: 6 > 3 > 5, 2014: 3 > 6 > 5, 2017: 5 > 3 > 6). you can see the data for yourself if you scroll down to where it says “surveys”. perfectly possible that there’s data that paints a totally different picture. this is just what i had on hand. that ranking also doesn’t mean the majority of people liked the season, but it does act as evidence that there are a lot of people whom it really worked on. basically, i wouldn’t say that season six is disliked so much as it’s divisive. people seem to either love it or hate it. with a smaller percentage that likes it, but for whom it isn’t a favorite. or who appreciate what it was trying to do but don’t think that it succeeded. 

as far as doublemeat palace goes i notice a similar phenomenon. people either really hate it or they really relate to it. either they think the style is bizarre and annoying or they think it’s delightfully surreal. so it really seems like it’s up to the individual whether they want to lend more credence to one audience reaction or another in order to assess quality. 

which is why i tend to use my own rubric. when i ask myself whether something is good or bad, i pay a lot of attention to (1) is the work trying to do or say something specific? (2) how unusual or challenging or astute is the thing the work is saying? (3) how coherently is it doing that, and on how many different levels? (4) on a formal level—dialogue, cinematography, costuming, acting, pacing—how fluently was it executed, and how well did the formal choices contribute to the ideas in (1)? 

for the record, i don’t think that doublemeat palace is the best episode ever. i just think it’s solid, and fits nicely into what i think the season as a whole was doing. but the reason i say that it’s “objectively” solid according to my personal rubric—which granted, you’re more than welcome to not share—is that (1) it has a pretty clear idea that it’s exploring. the drudgery of work stuff that i mentioned in the first paragraph. moreover i think that idea is really relevant to the season-long topic of “what makes it feel like adulthood sucks”. buffy having to take a menial food job fits into the season’s food motif that i talked about once, which in turn fits character-wise with buffy’s ambivalence about being alive. a somewhat grotesque/humiliating job fits with the mood of material existence being unpleasant. (also, xander impulsively chowing down on food speaks to him probably not being ready for commitment) (2) i think this whole subject was just hella daring for the show to do. having been a poor and suicidally depressed 22 year old in a fucked up sexual relationship while working a menial job, season six and episodes like doublemeat palace just ring true to me as something for a show about growing up to depict. sometimes real life really is a grind, and sometimes it really does feel profane, absurd, surreal, etc. (3) i really like the way that buffy, willow, and xander and anya’s stories all fit the theme of episode but in different ways. i wouldn’t say the episode is a super nuanced take on drudgery, but it does have layers thanks to the three different storylines, and it comes off as clearly conscious and oriented around its theme. there are other parallels like amy, spike, and halfrek each being influences, too. (4) there’s some cool formal execution. not all of it. willow’s story, like a lot of her mid-season-six arc, is kind of tediously on-the-nose. but i enjoy pretty much every second of buffy’s part of the episode, because the direction is so in control of it. and i like the absurdist and genre-conscious playfulness. the soylent green riff, etc. 

i also disagree on your assessment of agency in the season but this post is long enough as it is. regardless, i certainly don’t begrudge you your opinion. it’s an often clumsy season. it also sounds like we enjoy things in different ways--i genuinely don’t care too much about writers contorting things in the interest of theme. i’m mainly trying to push against the implications (1) that the season was obviously just trying to be dark and grim, and just for it’s own sake or something. instead of for deliberate and interconnected artistic reasons that one could analyze and talk about, and (2) that there is some monolithic opinion on and response to it.