#I just think their inherently complicated relationship is just so neat

[hadesknockedupintheunderworld]

(Sharing an au a friend and I explored a bit that I just need to be out there)

ㅤ

So. Surge and Kit share the same place. Now they don't have stable housing (as if they could afford that). No, they just sort of jump from place to place, living any place with some sort of roof. Right now they've been living in an abandoned cabin. The cabin is a bit run down, and the roof leaks a bit when it rains. There's no food. But the location isn't bad! It's close enough to civilization that the two could walk to the nearest city/town, but far enough away that no one'll bother them (much less care that they're squatting in abandoned property)

Now Surge has decided (for a reason we have not yet decided upon) that she wants to spend some time away from Kit (perhaps to prove for herself whether their relationship means anything more than the roles forced upon the two of them or the fact that having someone devoted to you can be a helpful tool, or if this all even matters. Or perhaps she just needs some alone time to think, to figure some stuff out). So, Surge (knowing that Kit can take care of himself) sends him out of the cabin for a while (doesn't give him an end date), tells him to go have fun or do whatever it is he wants to do for the time being.

Reluctantly, Kit obeys. He takes the front door out, closes it behind him.

As for Surge, she spends the better part of a week doing whatever. Leaves the cabin to get food, sleeps in, steals from window shops at different stores. She tries some things she's always wanted to out in the city. And in the end...she (although she won't admit it) finds it's a bit lonely without Kit there. She finds that she doesn't much mind her life as it is, nor does she really care if their relationship was forced upon them (because if Kit wants to go against it, that's for him to decide), and she finds out some things about herself (as she is now) and what she likes. So when week 2 begins, she waits inside. Sure, she still goes out to get food at first, but she just waits for Kit to come back.

Because he will, right? There's no way he can leave her alone for any longer, not with how close he sticks to her most of the time, can he?

Meanwhile, Kit hadn't gone very far. After obeying Surge, he'd circled the cabin and decided to stand at the back door. Day and night, rain or snow, he stands behind the cabin, just waiting for Surge to come back.

After about two weeks (Surge hasn't left the cabin for a couple days at least), she finally concedes, talking into the empty cabin.

"...Guess he's not coming back."

And she's...obviously not sad about it (definite lie), because this was always a possibility after they took their time alone. And if Kit decided he didn't want to wreak some havoc with her anymore, that he was no longer devoted, then she doesn't need him. She doesn't need flimsy "bonds". To be honest, in a few days she should probably gather her stuff and–

Amy walks through the front door of the cabin unannounced, doesn't even bother to knock or announce her presence.

And Surge, instead of going on the offensive, assuming Amy meant to fight, or instead of wondering how Amy found their current hideout, takes a brief minute to pretend that she is in no way even slightly depressed or living like shit (that she's totally taking care of herself and she just loves the sound of the rain drops hitting the wood floors).

But Amy, even if it takes a little bit, manages to pull the problem out of her. She's not convinced that Surge is right (that Kit abandoned the place and decided he doesn't need her), about as much as she's not convinced that Surge is completely fine over the prospect of Kit abandoning her.

"Okay, okay. It's fine if you're worried about him, you know. And I don't think it's like you say!"

"I'm not worried about him. He can take care of himself, and his choices are none of my business. He can do what he wants."

Amy sighs, shaking her head. "If he's lost out there in all that heavy rain, I'll find him." And if Surge says anything after that, Amy doesn't hear her. She tunes out everything else for a moment as she turns her head, happening to glance out the back window.

When Amy spots a glimpse of Kit, standing out back in the heavy rain, she isn't sure whether she's sadder about the implications of this, or angrier at Surge for not looking out her own window. Heedless of anything Surge could be doing or saying at the moment, Amy opens the back door, fully intending to drag Kit inside.

"How long have you been standing out here?!"

Kit only shrugs, looks at Surge just past her. "Waiting for you to come back."

Surge grits her teeth, anger and relief rushing her heart at once. "You idiot." She stomps out of sight, looking around for a dry cloth, while Amy pulls Kit inside and tries to start a fire in the old fireplace.

And while Amy is still angry at Surge (all she had to do was look behind the cabin!), she can't help but smile when Surge drapes the dry blanket over him.

Now, as for Surge, at some point she informs Kit that she'll be leaving this place soon, as the enemy (she gestures to Amy) has found them. So, she'll be leaving before sunrise.

The statement isn't very direct, but Amy gets the point. Surge's statement is code for "If you want to go with me, you better be there".

And Kit, perhaps he smiles just slightly, so relieved that Surge does want him (not that he requires this. Of course, if Surge left for good, he'd most likely trail her from afar. He doesn't even require appreciation or genuine want. But that doesn't mean he can't feel happy when she proves she does care, even a little).

And I'd like to think that after finding out for sure that he'd just waited in the same place for two weeks, she takes him to do some of the things she'd done during that first week (under the guise of giving him some enjoyment, since he didn't do anything those two weeks, even though she'd ordered him to. Although deep down, she'd also wanted to do these things with him, so as to enjoy them without feeling lonely, to share this with him) and treats him a little before they find their new temporary sleeping place.

[faeriekit]

🥭 Rank from most enjoyable/fun to write to least: Fluff, Smut, Angst, Crack.

I can't remember which fic got me into your writing but I am really enjoying health and hybrids I think the attention to detail with language barriers is neat 😊 I feel like these options can be mixed a lot in writing would the ranking change depending on the combos?

I need you to know before anything that I had half this post penned and my computer randomly refreshed my post and burnt all of it. 💀

So. I can't. Uh. I can't do all of my fics on a scale, because of, um,

that. So. I'm just going to do a straight best to worst. Sound good? Great because I have no other idea how to tackle any of this.

Fluff:

Best: Snowdrift Sanctuary. Although even my best fluff has a little bit of angst in it, this is a sweet, warm story of inter-species fostering and the care it provides. What's not to love? It was even a Phic Phight fill, so I got to surprise someone with it.

Worst: Rituals and Rites. There's nothing wrong with this one; it's a cute ask fill, it's got some great silliness in it and a little irreverence, and I'm always happy to archive my stuff on ao3 lest tumblr finally pull the plug, but I always dislike uploading individual lil' things onto ao3 when there isn't much to them. It's not bad, I just...don't have a lot of fluff to pad out this binary lol

Smut:

Best: Lazy Sunday. By the time I got to this one I'd largely already hit my stride writing smut stuff, I liked how this couple gelled (and even have a few as-yet-unwritten scenes of their relationship I may never get around to!) and I like the couple as they are: weird and complicated and persevering into a yet-unseen realm of intimacy! I'm also not super into the kink in question, so it was super nice to see the piece well received by people who are into it and thought it worked well lol. How sad would it be if you tried to write a niche kink and it ended up completely flopping lmao T_T I'd never show my face in this town again.

Worst: A Visitation. Do not get me wrong, I love this fic, but you gotta remember that I wrote the first chapter completely exhausted and out of my gourd with fucking cauvid. 😭 I'm shocked it came out coherent at all! And everyone helped me workshop the last chapter, and it took forever to the point where I was writing like thousands of words a day and it was eating up my whole life...and sometimes I still go back in to reread it and I find MORE errors! 😭😭 This fic had all the birthing pains! Worth it, but OW!

Angst:

Best: Dig Three Graves In Apartment 31C. I rreeeeeeally almost put Hybrids here, but in the end, Hybrids is a hopeful recovery fic. This fic is all grief and loss and the stench of the aftermath of acute trauma in the air. It is sad— sometimes I still get comments shocked at how well it worked lol— and although the excruciatingly tough epilogue yon author had to write lifts it a little, it's not... There's no cure for this. Everyone in this picture is dead. That's just the way it is.

Worst: Feet on the Ground. A similar deal: I really like this fic but there wasn't a great ending line to close on so it's just...mediocre. I probably should have just waited to see if time would fix it, but it was a Phic Phight fill and we're kind of on a timer during the event, and I wanted to get it out so I could start working on other people's asks, so... 6/10. Fascinating concept, mid execution.

Crack:

Best: Infection versus Infestation. It was either this or one of the MPreg fills lmao, and I just. There's just so much going on here. The support network. The mental health. The powerpoint presentations. Bees. Medical pamphlets. Aliens. QPRs. Maybe the real fic is in the groupchats you made along the way. No notes hands down my one true rec for weird fics; all the way up and all the way down, it's inherently GenderFucked and surreal and young idiot adult bullshit. I love them your honor.

Worst: Percy Jackson, God of the Shrimps. A discord in-joke never makes sense as a discord out-joke. I am astounded people read this to this very day. I make it worse every time I even mention it in a post, but hey, that's showbiz. If you read this and actually found something there, more power to you. If you read this and were like "???"...yeah lmao

I'm glad you're liking health and hybrids so far! It's so funny to think that Hybrids used to be my downtime fic to recover from my other fics lmao...now it's beating Blister Pack to the tune of an additional 100,000 hits. I genuinely can't even conceptualize that number in my head. It's a such a bonkers concept that so many people could be glancing at a medical trauma fic from lil' ol' me. High school Faer who took anatomy classes for fun would be ecstatic. In the end, I tried to get a couple of unique fics to fill each category just because I like them so much. Sue me. It's my fic and sometimes I wanna talk about them with people lol.

Thanks for asking! 🧡🧡🧡🧡 This was fun!

[nerves-nebula]

Do you have any loveless/heartless characters? I think they're real neat <3

this post got superrr long lol. im avoiding my homework <3

so this is a complicated ask for me because my definition of "love" is intentionally different from a lot of more mainstream conceptions of it. love isn't a feeling to me, it's something you DO for people you care about, right? you make someone feel loved by doing things that show you care. you putting in that effort and correcting your behavior for their sake is love.

so in that way i don't consider any of my characters loveless. because to me Love is something you chose to do so nobody can really be loveless inherently, they're just choosing not to act loving towards someone.

HOWEVER, from what i've gleamed from a quick google search about loveless aros, it doesn't necessarily seem that being loveless is exclusive to my definition of love?

like, i'm seeing loveless aros talk about not having those kinds of feelings or doubting/opting out of western ideas of love that don't fit them. some talk about not forming that kind of "deep emotional bond" though I'm confused if they mean like.. in general, or just romantically. cuz i've never had a deep romantic bond but i've never really considered that an indictment of Love Itself so much as a type of love that I'm just not a part of.

some people are describing it as specifically romantic love that they know they can't feel. but then again some people are just using it to mean they reject "love" as a label for their emotions/experiences, so like. idk.

it feels like im on the exact same page as a lot of these people it's just that their conclusion was to throw out the word love and mine was to not accept the premise that romantic love is the highest or most important kind of love and focus on, like, other forms of love that are important to me. like my siblings and friends.

soooo i can't say any of them are loveless for sure, cuz i don't identify that way and i'm not sure i grok it yet.

HOWEVER,

I do have aromantic characters, if that's what you mean. though a lot of them are in weird psychosexual situations with each other (just cuz i dont wanna have sex doesnt mean its not fun for my characters to), though there's one or two healthy QPRs thrown in there.

tbh my understanding (or lack thereof) of romance seeps into all of my characters so even the ones who are supposedly in love are doing it with hints of aromanticism cuz like. i dont care what a crush is, yknow? there's only so far romantic tropes can take me before i tap out and just do my own thing.

but as for like canonically aro characters i've got Hondo & quinn, dotty, toasty, Thomas (you guys don't know Thomas yet lol she's a peach), Ezra and Pet (pet is a weird monster tho and Ezra is sort of dead so idk if that counts), Misha Mistaka, Pasiflora, and probably my new one, Benbeck.

I also consider Groe aroace but that's like, a whole thing. cuz Groe is mostly known for having been married to Maureno (one of my characters i explicitly consider allosexual, if not alloromantic) and their relationship takes front and center at every point sfsdf.

because even when i dont see it as romantic i LOVE to make characters lives intertwined and dependent on each other. due to my own personal issues. to be honest i dont think groe and maureno are "in love" i just think they're inextricable dependent on each other. i think their "romance" is an inherently aromantic one because it's not about romantic feelings its about their friendship and trust, which includes kissing and sex sometimes but isn't diminished when they don't do those things.

I don't think Groe feels romantic feelings but i get that two characters who ostensibly have their weird fucked up "romance" be the core thing going on in their life isn't exactly the aromantic rep that ppl are looking for. i mean, it is for ME, but not for everyone.

i guess im just not Good Aro rep tho, cuz im not interested in romance but i AM interested in finding a person who i know I can depend on for everything and share my life with, yknow? i want someone who i know will always be on my side.

and that looks the same to a lot of poeple as romance but the experience of it was way different. cuz i can be with them forever and never want to do more than kiss their forehead as a sign of affection and that'd be great for me, while i KNOW that's unthinkable for a lot of people.

but when writing my characters it's hard to really portray that internal difference. so i think ppl just assume it's romance, and like, that's fine i guess?

so like, groe and maureno fuck cuz it's fun and cuz they have unresolved issues but it's not crucial or even really important to their relationship- to the point that they care WAY more about who each other is hanging out with than who each other is having sex with.

but now i'm rambling about asexuality and stuff.. uhhh the point is YES i have aromantic characters NO I dont know if they're "loveless"

but if a character isn't aromantic or at least aspec that's probably cuz i made a concerted effort to think of them as such.

[inventors-fair]

Hybrid Legend Commentary: From Across the Multiverse

I'm glad to see that a lot of people were excited for this contest, and I think that swinging for the fences in terms of what we know people will like pays off. There's no specific balance that needs to be struck, no lessons to be learned as if we're taking a test. Knowing what's fun is its own test, really, when you compare it against base desires. Is this getting a little too philosophical? Fine, let's get personal.

Sometimes I have contest ideas that are cerebral and weird and make sense only to me. Frankly, I have a lot of those, and those ideas are also based off of the notion that I know more about MTG than I actually do. Shocker: I'm just a dude playing cards. And I'm also someone who sees cool things happen and forms emotional attachments to them. Wort really was just a card that I fell in love with when I was looking at ways to make my very first precon deck happen back in the day. I played random Spirit cards, random creatures—and it worked, and it was fun. Now that we're in the present and I can think critically about card design, I still love those memories. Applying them here and watching everyone else apply them is what makes this all worthwhile.

As we get into commentary, don't forget that JUDGE PICKS are cards that either had an awesome idea I wanted to point out, challenged me in a cool way, or were just plain good and limited by the fact that we can only have so many slots in the top six. Carrying on:

@corporalotherbear — Glissa, Flame of Evolution (JUDGE PICK)

Giving haste in mono-green is super aggressive, but not entirely unheard of; without looking it up, green is either secondary or tertiary in it, right? On a legend, it's a bit of a push but WAR Samut did it, right? I think with the combat trigger, expanding the combat damage trigger from Glissa herself to other creatures is a nice twist on tradition. A curious thing to contend with is the integration of red... Who is the tyrant to which she is referring? Elesh Norn, Vorinclex? The red feels like it's coming from a non-Phyrexian philosophy, ish. Urabrask is a complicated character. Still, her role in the Hunter Maze feels fairly freeing to me. 

For the record, the abilities here are pretty great as it stands. Green and red could both use the growth ability, and it makes T5 plays (and small creatures, too) into Sliths, which is really damn neat. There's a chance that this could be a 5-drop just because of the benefit it brings to your board presence, but that's also assuming they can connect, so who knows? As an aggressive legend, she's pretty hard to deal with, and even if she attacks and dies the turn she comes down, it'll beef up your board and make for a wild time. I think GU would be the wildest combination, honestly—hasty blue creatures in the shell are nasty if they have the right evasion.

Unrelated to the card, back to the color philosophy questions: evolution is a strange beast when it comes to red philosophy. Is there inherent self-drive with how individuals are affected by their environments, or would a red-aligned character resist evolution and its involuntary chain of relationships? There's a wild conflict there that's really cool to think about.

~

@cthulhusaurusrex — Teysa, Envoy of Law

As far as non-interactive cards go, this one is certainly one that fits the bill. I think that first strike is one I'd have to hear an argument for in terms of blue's slice, but if there's enough relevance with the return, well... I get what the argument might be, but I don't think I'm swayed, especially since this card isn't the most fun for a board state. Only having one is probably best since it muddies up the board and is essentially a good taxing defender. Without the ability to utilize the stall on this particular card, I've got the current impression that this card wouldn't do much beyond being a big brick in the middle of combat. Nobody gets in, nobody gets out. Can't say that it's a fun incentive.

But the flavor is something I suppose I can roll with. Once more, we have a maze runner running with a different crew, and I'll admit that the Dragon's Maze version of Teysa was pretty great and had some power going for it. I can imagine that that's where you got your inspiration, since this card doesn't seem to have anything to do with either of Teysa's other cards. Fine by me! I just wish there was something more that she did besides gum the battlefield here. Still, the combat orientation is a nice touch.

~

@curiooftheheart — Gaddock Teeg, Paranoid Cenn

I want to defend this card because it feels remarkably fun and hateful; I used to play hardcore Azorius control back in the day, and having something like this on the battlefield is sometimes even better than Grand Abolisher. I mean, Grand Abolisher is incredible, but this also stops triggered abilities from triggering, it looks at abilities of lands... Oh, wait, it looks at the abilities of lands. Might want to clarify that your opponents can do mana abilities, because otherwise things will get real litigious. IIRC mana abilities can't be countered, right? I'll need to read up on that a bit more.

All the same, I think you were the only person who shifted a Lorwyn character, which makes sense because there actually weren't too many. Brion, Nath, and Wydwen were the only others, right? Maybe so. No matter! In another world, on a shadowy moor, the paranoia increases. Honestly even though it's already established as something that's been tried and true I like the approach you took to this prompt in a way that's actually canon-adjacent. Unless Gaddock died. In which case, shame on you. But yeah, I'm personally a fan of hatebears. I am also of the mindset that cards like this might be too complex for some players. They can just keep a Gaddock count or something, though. Not my problem.

~

@damndroid — Adrix, Unparalleled Genius

Ambitious, granular, and weird! Let's talk about it and start with the flavor. This is a dark turn for sure, and I have the feeling that we'd have to really dig deep to find what happened in the past. Nothing wrong with that, though! From childhood friends to adulthood fiends, you've got an evil genius who uses their friend's body for unethical experimentation. Or something. See, I get the gist, but I'm a little muddled in how the mechanics are supposed to convey the flavor.

Speaking of mechanics, your wording is all over the place, captain. Let's break it down. To the best of my ability, this card should say: "Whenever a non-Merfolk token you control is put into a graveyard from the battlefield, create a copy of that token, except its name is Nex, Research Assistant, it's 0/1, and it's a legendary Merfolk Zombie in addition to its other types. It gains haste. This ability triggers only once each turn." I'm a little stumped on the flavor of copying things like Treasure and Blood, or how the haste in blue is okay here. I think that aspects of this card would be okay, but perhaps a little more flavor explanation and mechanical directness could serve you well. Right now I'm not as on-board as I'd like to be.

~

@edenzom — Liesa, Vengeful Valkrie

Something tells me that this one wasn't supposed to be common, but the rarity didn't get added in? Don't worry about it too much. I'll assume rare or mythic, probably rare. With that, I do like the triggered ability, and I like the concept of the unearthing. Unless unearth is a big mechanic, I think you could've spelled it out as just an activated ability of this Liesa, but that's your call. I feel that there are a few too many restrictions on the cost of the unearthing, though. Sacrificing humans may be enough. You're also in a trap, though, where you want to run high numbers of humans, but you also probably want the relevant demons, devils and vampires to make this card work the way that it wants to. Is that going too wide? I have the feeling that we're playing with too much flavor and not enough archetyping here.

Still, I'm definitely okay with Liesa going a little bloodthirsty here. She's tapping into the red of the plane and coming back with the power of the demons with which she once forged allyships with. There are costs to everything, but one would be forgiven for assuming that she was a demon herself were it not for the typeline there. With all the avenues that people went for this week, I think this one is really cool conceptually and aligned with the real possibilities that Innistrad's past could have gone down. What if the demons come back, y'know? I think a little mechanical smoothing could've made it go down quiet well.

~

@feyd-rautha-apologist — Reyhan, the Dragonslayer

The flavor of this card from an Abzan standpoint, as well as a warrior standpoint, is pretty on-point for me. I'm curious what you were envisioning for the remainder of the timeline—did Reyhan succeed in defending her clan? If I'm interpreting right, then I can see a world where she becomes an outcast of sorts, a vigilante among the dragon-tribes. It's certainly an interesting angle, focusing more on the individual character rather than their role as a stalwart leader. White's heroic focus isn't often touched upon, at least when compared to the sometimes solitary nature of green and/or white's focus on the group and community.

The mechanics are a little iffy for me, specifically because of the keywords. The eternal hybrid problem is finding a way that both colors can have the overlap, and I feel that some flavor got in the way of in-pie reasoning. Reach is tertiary in white at best, and practically never appears in black (unless it's on a spider-themed card from what I can see). Deathtouch is out of white's pie. First strike is where there would be the most overlap, and that one's fine; it's still overshadowed by the other two. Regarding the wording choices, it's hard to find proper templating but I believe this card could read as: "Reyhan has X as long as it has at least one +1/+1 counter on it, Y as long as it has at least two +1/+1 counters on it, and Z as long as it has at least three +1/+1 counters on it." What would be the best XYZ abilities, I wonder? First strike could be a good aggressive baseline to start, but black and white together have flying, lifelink, double strike and in corner cases indestructible... It's up to you how these things stack and maybe keywords aren't the best place to go, honestly.

~

@helloijustreadyourpost — Zegana, Conclave Visionary (JUDGE PICK)

Oh my goodness, it's supposed to be HAND, that's why the flavor didn't make any sense to me on the first readthrough. Anyway, let's ignore the ribbing that I had planned and point out instead that yes indeed, we have another maze-runner-turned-strange here on stage, and I'm living for it just like I was then. Now, people who are deep into the Ravnican lore might give me crap for this but I like the idea of there being inter-Selesnyan conflict, a little bit. Kkkkinda. Conflict isn't the right concept, but like, different points of view I suppose? Green and white merfolk are bizarre but everyone's accepted, so there's that. Zegana's a cool character from what I remember, so this would be a cool break indeed.

And there's one thing that Zegana's known for, and you've brought that to life here for sure. I wanted to commend this card as a judge pick because of how much of a pain it would be in limited and how the Selesnyans really needed a card like this to go hog wild. It's a card that probably would entice commander players with its swinginess and it fits perfectly into the shells that already want the +1/+1 counters. Board buffs make the world go round and she's no exception. It's also super interesting that everyone BUT her gets the counters. That benevolence is a good touch to show the differences between both card and character.

~

@hypexion — Feather, the Fallen (JUDGE PICK)

Angels without flying definitely get my attention. Looking up Feather's past (again, I'm not super deep into Ravnica), the fact that she had her wings bound makes this card agonizing to see. An angel that has to walk among the blood-soaked streets and make her mark known, disgraced in her power, sword in hand... What's really cool to me is how not-Rakdos she is here. There's no sense of joy or revelry, no art in what she does. There's business to attend to, refracted through the blood covering her eyes... I'm reading too much into this but the POINT is: it's cool.

The mechanical thoughtfulness is also a good touch. While it's a little close to home, the fact that it has to target Feather herself is a good step. Removal begets removal, and buffs mean more removal. I do think that she should be rare and not mythic, but only because opening her would mean a hyper-narrow combat deck if you're gonna build around her aggression. I don't think there's that much real estate to be had. Now, cantrips in the right shell might make her far stronger than I'm initially thinking. Right now, though, I'm landing in the camp of decreased rarity, one line of flavor, and you're golden. Unlike Feather. Poor angel.

~

@kalinary — Etrata, the Consumption

I always thought that oozes were more of a Simic thing, but I'm willing to buy that the murky and stinky under-sewers would be home to a nasty character like this. As for the how and the why... Well, I think that we're missing a couple things on this card. I'd like to have known more about what this card really represented, what she does here, what part of her is still vampyric and the like. "The Consumption" is a pretty big title. I'm not currently getting a sense of story scale.

Mechanically, I'm also underwhelmed. Having to pay a cost that's also contingent on combat damage, AND the fact that it has to eat a creature, AND the fact that it has no evasion and the body is really underwhelming for a mythic... There's a lot left to be desired with this card. When making these big mythics, the things to consider aren't just how the character on them is depicted, but also: if this card is filling in a powerful slot in a set, what can you do to make it theoretically stand out above the theoretical rares? What's the floor/ceiling for that balance? It's a fine card conceptually and I don't dislike the ability. It just feels like a bulk uncommon that's missing flavor text more than a big Golgari legend.

~

@maypletreeway — Gor Muldrak, Trailblazer

I think that I'd've wanted to be told more about Gor's journeys through an attached blurb rather than the flavor text we have here. In that limited space, what I would have wanted to see was how Gor changed completely. What about the red separates him from the blue of his research? From the beginning, I mean—because here and now, I can definitely sense the gist: crazy research guy cuts down the land, makes the paths, discovers the salamanders. That I'm on board with. With how the flavor text is written, I feel like this is more on the continuation of a timeline rather than the alternate/twisted universe.

What I don't fully understand is why, mechanically, Gor has protection from salamanders here. It made sense on the Commander card, but not as much when you're looking at a table where you're the only person making them. Flavor as justification only goes so far. Frankly I think that a solid protection from blue would've been fine. IMO the only reason his first card has any kind of protection is because it was intended for folks to turn salamanders against one another. What I really like about this card is the aggression that you're putting on display. Sacrificing a land to get a 4/3 is pretty bonkers even if it's not as fast as Titania + Safekeeper or something. I'd run a version of this in Gruul aggro.

~

@misterstingyjack — Vargus, Wrathful Raider

Vargus is one of the hottest pirates to sail the multiverse seas, so you've got a lot to make up for in that department. What's happening here, I think, is that you've made a strange Commander-y card that's an odd duck in limited. The thing about goading is that you've got this scenario where you're encouraging folks to attack in a multiplayer manner—goad's specific wording implies it. With a standard set, is that the most grokable? I don't think so, not to the extent that it should be one's first choice for mechanics here.

Still, the vibe of the card is significantly different. Cutting the blue takes the seafaring nature out of the pirate and replaces it with the brutality of plundering. Brutal indeed—a strong way to spread the love. If we're just looking at this from a multiplayer perspective, this card does everything it needs to do well, and the small pirates get to swing in and create trouble for an already troubled opponent. Giving them creatures that deal damage is pretty nuts even if they might not stick around, y'know? In 1-v-1 limited, you're going to get your hits in and I think that this card can hold its own. I'll contend that this design is better in a Commander set than a standard set. I'll also contend that it's pretty slick regardless.

~

@nine-effing-hells — Kruphix, God of Whispers

You're gonna have to make a pretty strong argument for having a mechanical shift from devotion being less than five to less than seven, and why you changed the wording when Phenax is available for a template. As for scrying and surveiling, I think that highlights a personal pseudo-frustration that we live in a world where both of those things are viable in a standard environment. As far as the gods go, I have to say that this card itself feels weak comparatively. There's Eligeth who does it without the life loss, and the build-around is asking for more than I feel is reasonable.

A lot's not changed between this and the original Kruphix with same mana value, same stats. With the manifestation, though, I'll admit that you've made a super cool connection between Kruphix as a prophetic god of knowing re:possibility and as a god of knowing re:accruing that knowledge. Greatness at any cost and whatever, right? The people demanded knowledge and there came a god that rewarded both cunning and ambition. That much I'll absolutely give to you. The rest of the card isn't making me super enthused.

~

@spooneater457 — Tolsimir, Bane of the Conclave

The alternative history you've presented here is concise and pretty well-done. What's up with everyone bringing up Ravnican legends in cool ways this contest? Anyway, not knowing much about Tolsimir beyond the wiki, I think the sense of story you've made is quite interesting. Tolsimir lives, and the dryad is punished, and there's a lot of shakeup in the guild. If nothing else, you can take the joy in knowing that your card made me actually look up the Karlov Manor story to fully understand what was happening.

I do know my mechanics, though, and I know that you've given lifelink to a creature that's red and green, and neither one of those colors have access to lifelink even on their own. Riot's another story, and I appreciate that, although it could've used some reminder text. The damage trigger is, AFAIK and unfortunately, out of red's pie. Green can get some contingent damage, but this is pretty widespread. I think that this card's the sum of its parts and some of its parts are really messed up to the point of being way out of line. As much as I think your story path is one of the coolest divergent splits, I would go back and check the hybrid relationship.

~

@stareyedesper — Dack, Enduring Scoundrel

As you might've seen by now, this was a hybrid contest, not just a multicolor one, where you had to change (e.g. replace) one of the character's colors. Additionally, this was supposed to be based on legendary creatures and not planeswalkers. I'll make some quick judgements, but do keep in mind the contest requirements for next time.

Mechanically, I think it was ambitious to have the specific haunt clause on there. For ease of access, I feel that it could've been easier to just have a death trigger that was contingent upon Dack remaining in exile.

Flavorfully: this is where I'm also a little bit lost. Where is the alterternate aspect happening here? As far as I can tell this takes place right after War of the Spark when Dack dies, and thus becomes a ghost, but that's just one possibility and not a full change of timeline. 

~

@tanknspank — Kaseto, Orochi Maverick (JUDGE PICK)

The orochi are a weird bunch, aren't they? I think you're really pushing the limits of green recursion here, but hey, green gets cards back, red gets the temporary reanimation—there's nothing technically being broken here. It's a great modification staple, and I feel that seeing the orochi reclaim their wild side is an interesting move. Reading up on Kaseto, I can see where you've gone for the change of timeline pretty exactly: he rejects his ancestors and fights against the encroaching world centuries later.

And as far as limited goes, this one feels like a beater, and there's not much more to say about it. I can see the late game having some awesome auras coming down from the creature that had died before with the auras on them, and equipment in the form of reconfigured creatures makes the aggro deck that much more aggressive. Zero complaints here. I think he's a fun casual commander, a fun limited card, and you can use a lot of natural development and sacrifice to make him worthwhile. Maybe I'm not having my heartstrings tugged at with this change of life experience, but that hardly matters when the snake kicks butt—hence a well-earned JP.

~

@wildcardgamez — Killian, Memory Mage (JUDGE PICK)

Young Killian embracing his light side and kindling it with the fires of independence? Yes please! That's a nice change, and as much as the Strixhaven story was...something I didn't really follow, reading up on it makes this card far more unusual. The question the becomes whether or not the Lu family was now all Lorehold in their history (complete alternate universe) or whether this is the path where Killian has broken completely free of his father's shadow. I dunno about the rest of the Lorehold folks, but Killian here certainly feels more education-oriented and down-to-earth. Mechanics are pretty rad for heroic nonsense as well. The timing window restricts this card, but you've got to learn when to play it so that you can maximize the value. Additionally, there's no reason you can't run it out for exile-from-graveyard synergy, but what happens afterwards? Well, maybe it was a mistake to do that, or maybe not, and you learn as you play the cards more. I think the benefit of an school-themed set is that it's fun to have meta moments in that vein. It feels meta to me, anyway. One note is that it should be "exile an instant card" and not just "an instant," because of the way that objects in zones are referred to. I like how it's utilized both for removal and for combat benefits. Neat all around!

Tune in tomorrow for the heat death of the universe. Love yall! @abelzumi

[prettyprettypurin]

Not to bring up queer discourse because it is truly rancid and unproductive most of the time but the way people will be like ‘gender is not real’ and then simultaneously believe that sexuality is strict and fits in a neat little box is so absurdly silly to me like… ppl say all the time “lesbians can be attracted to women and “”””woman aligned””” non-binary people” what the hell does the even mean. Truly. Cause I don’t think there’s any other way to interpret that aside from “non-binary people that LOOK like women to me and I therefore see as women” which is so weird and invalidating honestly.

Like let’s all be honest here if you saw a non-binary trans man who doesn’t plan to transition out on the street and thought they were attractive your not gonna know unless you actually pursue them, and if you did, do you seriously want me to believe that there’s a little switch that would go off in your head once you found out how they saw themselves and you’d go “EWWW this CREATURE has been touched by MANHOOD” and poof you’d suddenly no longer think they’re hot. Like do you really expect me to believe that because I don’t. You can recognize their personal identity and NOT see them as a woman or “woman aligned” person and still think they’re hot.

Besides even if this hypothetical person WAS in the middle of or post transition… where is the line between trans/non-binary men and non-binary he/him transmasc butch lesbians. Would you like to get in front of the class and point to it on the board??? Cause IF there is one that thing is about as thin as a strand of silk. Now don’t get me wrong, this is NOT to say that there is *no* difference between these two identities and I completely understand that plenty of trans men do not want to be lumped in with lesbians for the very obvious reason of feeling like that inherently misgenders them, but there are also plenty that ARE fine with it because of their personal relationship with their gender, and let’s be real a significant portion of them have been in the lesbian community for years anyway and it is their safe space and very much their home and they are also aware of how they are viewed by society/outside their own perspective of themselves (which as much at it sucks, is also an aspect that is unfortunately important in gender/sexuality conversations even if everyone wishes it wasn’t).

And then to further complicate the matter there’s amab non-binary people, who people just LOVE to treat as “basically men” or “tainted” or some kind of other nasty terf crap. The point that I’m trying to make is that people seem to have a FUNDAMENTAL misunderstanding of what non-binary means, it’s quite literally NOT binary and while SOME peoples identities are going to clearly and neatly fit in boxes, many will not. No one is telling you that you HAVE to be attracted to these people or that you yourself ever will be but sometimes people that identify as lesbians are going to be because human beings and real life are messy and every second you waste arguing online with someone about their personal identity (who you are NEVER going to be able to convince to change by the way in case you haven’t figured out how that works yet) is a second that you could be using to do literally *anything* actually productive for your community.

To quote Kourtney Kardashian, “Kim, there’s people that are dying.”

[d3sertdream3r]

I loved Ezra so much too!!! I’m worried about his future though, SW has a history of killing off or ruining their best characters 

I feel this with every fiber of my being. Ezra is really special to me, and literally every other character in Star Wars that is special to me is dead! 

I gotta say, I’m not just worried about them killing Ezra though. I’m worried about him being sidelined despite how powerful and competent he was shown to be in Rebels. He had a huge connection to the WBW and the Loth-Wolves, which are both inherently tied to the Mortis gods. I don’t like the idea of him being left out of that storyline going forward. 

It was also strange to me that he didn’t know anything about Thrawn’s base, or what the witches were up to. Ezra is known for sneaking around and ruining people’s evil plans, so it felt weird that he hadn’t interacted with them much or gone back there at all to sabotage them. Speaking of which, I thought it would be really cool for Ezra and Thrawn to begrudgingly team up and work together during their time away from the galaxy like everyone wanted, but oh well. 😒

I’m hoping they parallel Thrawn’s devotion to the Ascendancy with Ezra’s devotion to Lothal at some point; I just think that would be neat to explore. I like when heroes and villains have complicated relationships and connections. Despite Thrawn’s hatred of Ezra, I think he would admire Ezra’s commitment to protecting his people since that’s his own main goal in life. 

There’s also theories about Maul coming back since he has connections to the Mortis Son, and I hope that’s true because Maul and Ezra have one of my favorite dynamics in all of Star Wars. Like I said, I love when heroes and villains have complicated relationships! Plus I want my dream of Maul being redeemed to happen. That poor guy never had a chance at a real life being raised by Darth Sidious, as Obi Wan pointed out in Clone Wars. I think he genuinely cared about Savage and he genuinely cares about Ezra, even if it manifests in a super toxic and disturbing way as a dark sider. I want him to find true peace and become one with the Force on the light side, but I don’t know if I’m lucky enough to get that! 

We’ll see how it all goes, but I am excited to see Ezra meet the other Mandoverse characters (especially Din and Grogu, their interactions will be so interesting to see)! I do wish that he got a purple lightsaber though. I love the emitter as a nod to Kanan, but the standard blue color doesn’t suit the fact that he’s the incarnate of chaos. The blue one he used to have had a fricking gun attached to it for crying out loud! Or it would be hilarious if he just went through all the colors. Every season of every show he’s on his kyber crystal breaks, so every time we see him, he’s got a new color! (I'm only half kidding, that would actually be super funny 🤣 )

I hope we get to see him thrive in his Disney Princess Era™ and tame all the animals going forward! No matter what, Eman is going to kill it. Ezra's by far the best animation to live action character transition we've had!

[yandere-monoma]

on the subject of this, re: the inherent strilonde incest fetish gene

i think dave (and rose, honestly) have both suffered with an intense blurring of emotional and sexual lines between themselves and their guardians that's created at least one era/phase of having some sort of huge underlying attraction/crush on them that they quickly diverted into something else the second they acknowledged those feelings for what they were (dave into idolation and rose into resentment, respectively)

sidenote: when will my brain let me write lalondecest

and i think that's one of those things that dave both HEAVILY projects onto harry (aided by the fact that he is absolutely right in his guess that harry shares a similar inclination towards john) and something that really baffles him about harry as a person because i dont think that dave really can accept that harry's trauma... 'counts'... or rather, dave looks at his past incesteous affection for bro as a chicken or an egg scenario (what came first, the grooming or the fetish for all things incest??? did my crush on bro aid in me getting groomed or did i get groomed into a crush on him???) where he's more or less accepted that the latter is the correct and right answer and that he's valid in having experienced that, because it wasnt his fault if bro acted towards him first. but he doesn't see john initiating with harry and he doesnt see harry undergoing any additional sexual abuse or explicit grooming (besides what he's done himself) or even the isolation with only one other human during a very important neurodevelopmental period so he's just... BAFFLED by how they could have reached the same conclusion about what they need in their relationships. like he just does not GET how harry's wires got so identically crossed when their experiences couldnt be more different. and he hates it cuz it makes him doubt the nice and neat answer he had finally landed on and it just... makes him feel so hopeless when it comes to family and how good one can be

interesting too because i think harry's approach to his frustration towards john is actually very similar to how i see rose's relationship with her mother. resentment building precisely because of all the (admittedly, fucked up!!!) things they just wouldnt commit to doing even though they can (allegedly) SEE that they WANT to.

another sidenote: my lalondecest hcs range from them only having a one-time encounter that rose resents for the lack of follow-through and repeat instances to their relationship mostly being defined by sporadic kisses and fondling and the resentment coming from never going all the way and thus never feeling like her trauma 'counted' cuz it was only molestation (insert the complicated struggle of understanding your trauma is severe but it never feeling severe or extreme enough, especially in comparison to a friend's backstory HOO)

[linecoveredinjellyfish]

ok infodump time.

so i was just thinking yesterday about solomon reed from Hello from the Hallowoods. he's a really deeply evil character, absolutely and unambiguously. sure, there are details included that make him a somewhat complicated character, that bring him back from cartoon villain to just really evil guy, but fundamentally, his point of view is never meant to be truly sympathetic. you're suppoed to hate him, and that never really goes away.

and often, i find it hard to relate to villains like that. it's difficult for me to hate a character who i know exists primarily to be hated. but i really do, authentically, hate solomon reed. i am very emotionally invested in him as a villain. and it just occurred to me recently why that is.

see, a lot of his villainy is focused on and contextualized by his relationship with his son, percy. mainly because solomon still hasn't come to terms with the fact that he has a son rather than a daughter. and i think what makes solomon a really compelling villain, is that the narrative never looses sight of the fact that it didn't have to be this way.

this outcome was not inevitable. there is no inherent, immutable aspect of solomon's personality that forced him to lose his son. he is, yes, a self-important, closed-minded zealot on a power trip and something between him and percy has been irreparably broken by it. all of that is absolutely true.

but solomon is a human being. he is shown and established to be capable of self-reflection, of humility, of guilt, of loving and prioritizing his kid. those capacities exist within him. the audience knows it and percy knows it and solomon is in half-hearted denial about it, but he could choose his son. and it's also shown and established, in no uncertain terms, that his son might be willing to forgive him if only he made a genuine effort to deserve it.

this is a choice. it's a choice he's had literally every opportunity to walk back. more opportunities than most people get. and he just keeps digging the hole deeper.

that's what makes him a compelling villain.

(also kinda neat that he was faced with the classic, "would you rather have a living son or a dead daughter?" and he picked "dead daughter," and then he literally learned to raise the dead, for some reason expecting to have a dead daughter, and guess what? he's still got a dead son. very cool, i think, as a comment on violent transphobia. dead trans people are still trans.)

also, interesting as hell that percy's deadname is "persephone."

like, first of all, there's the obvious "trapped in the land of the dead" association. but also, it's explicitly mentioned in the podcast that "persephone" means "bringer of destruction."

and considering the fate of percy's entire family, well.

our little death omen.

BUT

that's not his fucking name. his name is percy, and he's mourning his family as much as anyone else.

the only reason his family fell apart is because they refused to accept his transition. they destroyed themselves trying to force him to be persephone. talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

he's only an omen of impending doom, only persephone, when they force him to be. otherwise, he's just some guy named percy.

once again, we come back to the idea of choice. both the prophecy and its fulfillment are their choice, their invention. once again, it didn't have to end this way.

anyway. this was long. fucking 10/10 plot thread, no notes. percy reed is the best character in the podcast.

My favourite way of choosing podcast to listen to is seeing people being batshit crazy, extremely enthusiastic, writing serious interpretations and silly posts about it, posting fanart, etc.

So, audio drama folks, please reblog this and write me some amazing stuff about your favourite podcasts. It can be honest recommendation! Maybe some blorbo thoughts about your fav character! Or deep reflection about themes and motifs! Whatever you would like to share with someone but didn’t have a chance to. Don’t worry about me knowing what you talking about, just pure your little podcast heart for me, pretty please. (And of course as always official podcast accounts are welcome to join!)

[betaoctillery]

i dont follow ppl that dont support mspec lesbians btw. not only is it bullshit gender/sexuality policing but its ahistorical as shit when bisexuals & lesbians were almost indisguishable from one another until a very specific point in the 1970s when terfs and political lesbians began dividing the community by excluding anyone who had ANY association to perceived masculinity, which included trans women (bcus terfs thought of them as men), bi women for sleeping with men, butches for expressing masculinity, and women of color for racist reasons which posited that they arent feminine/women bcus many dont look/act/talk exactly like cis/het white women.

at any rate, the current accepted definition for the term lesbian is inherently bisexual! everyone says it means “attraction to women and nonbinary ppl” (which is nb-phobic outright ANYWAYS by lumping ALL nonbinary ppl with women -- this is what ppl are criticizing when they say we’re treated as “women-lite”) so if youre not being a nb-phobic asshat, you then have to acknowledge that woman and nonbinary are different genders, thereby making lesbianism a fundamentally bisexual identity as it includes to attraction to two or more genders. 

like think critically for a moment. what about a bigender lesbian who feels like they are both a man and a woman? do you personally get to decide, do you personally get to have the authority, to choose which identity of theirs to suppress in order to cram them into one specific neat little box? whichever way you try to pigeonhole them, youre promoting gender binarism, which is nb-phobic. trying to cut up and divide ppl’s identities like nations erecting borders is dehumanizing. 

another aspect of this issue ive noticed is that almost every single person ive met who self-identifies as a bi or mspec lesbian is trans or nonbinary. they often have complicated relationships to gender and sexuality that sweeping statements like “lesbians cant like men!!!” end up erasing their experiences. ive seen ppl claim its a term used by cis women to describe sleeping with trans women and i cant stress enough how in all the reading and research ive done on bi lesbianism that ive never once seen that cited as a definition or something having been done in practice. its literally just ignorant teenagers or young adults in their early 20s who know nothing about their community’s culture or history talking straight out of their asses. and if there are ppl who do this, theyre extreme outliers and its disingenous to act like mspec lesbians would defend such a level of transphobia when, again, most mspec lesbians are transgender themselves and are well aware that this division occured bcus of terfs.

read queer history yall. for the love of whatever you consider sacred and holy in this world pls fucking read queer history. dont get all of your information off of social media, random unsourced carrds made by teenagers who obviously dont make an effort to learn about their own community, and bad faith internet debaters who make conclusions drawn off what amounts to nothing more than “vibes” essentially. these people have really big loud mouths, but theyre simply wrong. material history will never agree with them. 

throughout history, bi and lesbian have more or less meant and were treated as the same thing, including both women who exclusively were attracted to other women AS WELL AS women who were attracted to both women and men.

and until a single exclusionist can provide sources that can prove that 70′s lesbian separatism wasn’t a huge, well documented movement that resulted in much of the exclusionary attitudes and its effects we see even today, im just gonna continue to laugh at how childishly they cover their ears and go “la la la la” when presented with verifiable and cited evidence that this happened.

[elumish]

You saying to avoid “'this white girl’s relationship with this white boy is forbidden because society hates love' forbidden love because it’s a bit played out" needlessly isolates a race of people. I know it's popular to make fun of white people as a perceived table-flip, but it's uncomfortable like it would be to point out any other race. You could say a standard 'nothing obviously wrong' relationship has no need to be dramatic, without putting a spotlight on a type of people for no reason.

Good morning (or whatever time zone you're in)!

I'm going to assume this is in good faith and you're not a troll, so I hope you take this with all due respect when I say, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how race is talked about and presented in media.

I'm getting a whiff of "reverse racism" in this comment, and so first things first, bringing up the existence of whiteness isn't making fun of white people. (Also I think you're using the term table-flip wrong, but that's neither here nor there.) Acknowledging that white people are white*, and acknowledging that white people are treated differently in media than People of Color, isn't racist or making fun of white people or needlessly isolating a race of people.

Avoiding talking about race, and avoiding talking about the privileging of certain identities, is how we as a society get away with continuing to pretend that racism doesn't exist and the way that People of Color are treated in society is disconnected from the color of their skin or their cultural or ethnic background. We as a society talk about white people differently!

There's nothing inherently uncomfortable about talking about that--and if there is, well, maybe that's a discomfort you should sit with. Maybe you should consider why you're so uncomfortable with the idea of talking about race and about whiteness.

And now to the actual topic you were referencing.

I'm a writing advice blog. I give writing advice. And one of those pieces of advice is, when tropes become old and stale and irrelevant, let's stop writing about them.

Now, I will acknowledge that there are a lot of reasons why a white girl and a white guy might be forbidden from being in a relationship--a mismatch in socioeconomic status, a difference in religion, etc.

But what writers often do in stories where the idea is that it's forbidden because Society Hates LoveTM is they replace the very real struggles faced by same-sex or same-gender couples and interracial couples (as well as interfaith couples) and place them on a white girl and a white guy who are the same in class, religion, culture, and everything else that tends to actually cause this forbidden love.

It's generally cishet white people taking other people's real trauma and making it palatable to white people by removing the queerness and removing the mention of race. We get nice, neat stories where we get to pretend that sometimes love is just Forbidden because Society Is Mean, and it has nothing to do with things like homophobia or racism. It lets white people tell other people's stories without having to think about those other people too hard, because they're good with those white cishet people being together, but they might not actually be so okay with it if those people were both men or both women or if one of them wasn't white.

*the concept of whiteness is extremely complicated and situation-specific, but that's a topic for a different essay

[raguna-blade]

So having actually properly finished the event story wise...

Yeah we have actually genuinely good natured actors trying to do right by the world at large, The Pope is actually trying to live up to the ideals of his title and position, the Church at least at the top end seem to actually be like...Mostly actually decent folks?

The Church, or at least the top levels, are actually trying to live up to the ideals and stated goals of their religion? No “OH BUT I SHALL BECOME A GOD AND USHER IN A NEW ERA WITH THE LORDS BLESSING” but “oh yeah, hey we should actually try to improve the world somewhat and Hey I happen to be in a position of power and i’m trying to actually get shit done?”

like...Ok, I can’t recall who it was, THINK it was @fefeman who mentioned that Laterano is super sugar filled, and absolutely it has tremendous amounts of uh...Well, Things are Fine, Don’t Ask Questions, It’s All Cool. Like there’s a degree of very very obvious problems going on in Laterano (The Executors aren’t like...Not a Thing you have if everything is fine and on the up and up right?)

And that’s an important detail, i think though it doesn’t get quite as much attention as it could in part because it’s just one part of the whole thing and as an individual metaphor it could probably get out of hand if they leaned into it but, because there’s a bit where they’re talking about some desserts at the Cold Buffet, and of the people in the room, Two Outright Hate the Questionable Cactus...Whatever the hell they are. Puffs? Some kind of desert.

Those are Mostima and Villiv, who both just find the things...Blech. Nasty. Awful. Gun-Knight SomethingSomething Absolutely loves them, and from what we’ve seen of the gun knights they seem arguably the most like...Deeply into the faith?

And then There’s Yvangelista who all but says “ok, they’re actually whack, but they’ve got some neat qualities” which is....A Weird Statement? Like He’s Constantly eating sweets, offering em to folks, which in the metaphor is very much trying to sell the sweetness and shell of laterano and all that, but like at the same time, aside from whatever weirdness is going on with Sankta/Sarkaz unions and the pretty open implications that Cecilia might well be some kind of Saint Figure (!?!?!?!?!?) the guy I feel just...Has been eminently Reasonable?

I said it before, but I feel like either i’ve missed something and have gotten suckered, but I honestly don’t feel like we’ve got the typical suite of villains pulling strings and fucking things up (or simply exposing the systems inherent flaws and monstrous nature) so much as...We’ve got folks who are trying to do good, who know things are Complicated and are going “ok, So...What can we do to actually help things in general?” and to take that bit from near the end that mentions his speech being in the history books, maybe he was on the level?

like

???????????????????????????????????????????

It’s not like they don’t make a very big point about how Laterano’s church isn’t the big all encompassing friendly friend friend pal that it’s extended feelers out there and branches of church have engaged with. Ando seemed to imply they hot erased a town, or let it get deleted at least. The Liberi Sankta Relationship seems to actually be rocky to listen to Patia talk about, even if it’s not as immediately obvious to everyone involved. The Pathfinders are very much not vibing with the Main Church, and have some genuine beef but like...

Even So!

People in power trying to do right? Seemingly more or less on the up and up by the by?

I don’t THINK i’m missing anything but at the same time, I feel like i must be?

[nailgunstigmata]

ok since people were interested <3 i hope my brainworms make sense/aren‘t disappointing

essayposting under the cut/me rattling around in dennis‘s brain like its his bdsm drawer (cw for canon rape/csa mention and the unhealthy way he deals with it)

ok this is kinda all over the place and lots of me making shit up but this is what I read into the bed poop show because I think Dennis Reynolds should be studied in a lab. sorry if this is all obvious stuff or/and confusing, im not very good at expressing myself <3 dennis core of me i think

The fact that the „tools“ Dennis uses are both unsafe and painful is just a very neat character detail I think!! Zip ties can be dangerous and apparently hurt a lot, which makes sense, since they seem to really cut into your skin. Same goes for duct tape!! It’s not as dangerous (as far as my very cursory research told me) but it’s still not safe, not recommended, and probably hurts like shit (i don’t have any experience but i have ripped a bandaid off before lol)

Either him or the woman, one of them has to be hurt. One walks away with bruises. And that’s what makes it so interesting that he doesn’t just likes to bind, he also likes to be bound. Im spitballing here and probably overthinking stuff and liberal with my interpretation or whatever but I think since Dennis focuses primarily on his own pleasure (sometimes the woman doesn’t cum), he wouldn’t tie them up if being bound was something he considers an inherently pleasurable experience. It’s only about the control he has/doesn’t have.

We really don’t know what exactly happened with Mrs Klinsky because of how much Dennis represses traumatic memories, but we do know that he has at least to some point internally recontextualized it as consensual, because he can’t accept the fact that he was victimized in this way. So with him processing the whole experience as something he let happen, and even actively pursued, I think it makes a lot of sense that he would want to play with control in that way, both by having it and having it taken away from him, in a way he still struggles with having experienced. So I think the liking to bind part is reclaiming power he’s had taken away from him and simultaneously punishing the person weak enough to have had it taken from them (internalized self hatred is a disease and I’m diagnosing him), while the liking being bound part is self punishment, both on the physical level, and also having control taken away in a more direct, physical way, aka back then you could have stopped it but you didn’t, now you can’t stop it, which relieves you of the responsibility somehow, makes things easier to process and deal with on the one hand, but is also a scary and possibly retraumatizing experience if you aren‘t doing it safely, and lets be honest here, theres no way he is. Aka I diagnose you with hypersexuality in an attempt at dealing with your trauma and also sex as self harm and a practice thats either punish or being punished, winning or losing, having all control or none at all. And then the BDSM just reiterating the whole thing and making it more blatant.

So yeah! The bondage makes complete sense with Dennis’s complicated relationship with control and power dynamics, especially with his past experiences, but the zip ties and duct tape as both unsafe and painful are a good symbol for the unhealthy edge that rots into the core of the entire experience, in a way that I think says a lot about his character. BDSM is not inherently unsafe ofc, you can probably even engage with the tools in a safe way, but this is Dennis, so of course he doesn’t. I need to study him in a lab <3

nobody wants to hear that but i could actually write an essay about dennis‘s choice of duct tape and zip ties like hes soo…hes sooooo

[transxfiles]

[ID: A screenshot of an unanswered Tumblr ask from an anonymous sender. The content of the ask says, "Nimona wasn't good and all it has is gay men thats it." /End ID]

gosh alright i needed to discuss this but i put the whole thing under the cut bc it's long and a little vent-y and very train-of-thought bc im tired and covid-sick and this is the third time i've heard someone be mad about nimona being "bad gay rep" in the past 24 hours.

deleted the original ask / blocked anon bc i really don't have time to argue with terminally online gays who haven't, like, gone out and interacted with queer ppl irl, but i just need to know - when did it become stylish to hate on nimona?? this is maybe the fifth time i've seen someone act this way about the film since news dropped that it's coming out in 2023 and i need to know.

is this one of those things where it's suddenly cool to pretend that any lgbt media made before 2020 is "bad rep"? do we hate nimona bc ND Stevenson suddenly reminds people of pre-dashcon tumblr? is it bc she-ra ended and the owl house is suddenly "The Best Sapphic Rep Ever" at least in kid's shows? you realize you can uplift your favorite queer media without pushing other stuff down, right?

also i frequently see people saying that nimona is "bad rep" bc "it's just two gay dudes kissing in the background :/" and like. we are forgetting that the titular character, nimona, is an expression of ND Stevenson's own exploration of her gender? are we ignoring that he (ND) is a bigender/genderfluid lesbian and that nimona was a major step in them figuring himself out? bc for me personally (as a nonbinary lesbian myself) it was life changing to read nimona as a kid and see a character who didn't really give a fuck about which gender she presented as, because it was okay for her to just be nimona. and as a kid it was also nice to see two gay dudes in a complicated relationship, even if it was just secondary characters, because it was interesting and intriguing and portrayed as normal. not to mention the nonbinary scientist character who becomes significant in the second act - they were pretty damn cool too!

i feel like if people look at nimona and the only "lgbt rep" they see is "two gay dudes kissing in the background :/" that's kinda a red flag to me bc like. this is a story that is so inherently queer, by a bigender lesbian, and you're only able to see these two gay characters? you can't see the other identities so clearly represented, or, hell, you can't even see the beauty of the story about being scared that you're a monster and that the monster will overtake you but you also know that you need to let the monster out to protect those you love and AUGH. the story itself is beautiful and if you go to it ONLY looking for "lgbt rep" you're going to be disappointed bc it's a story first. it's a beautiful story and i feel like people expect so much from it when really it started out as a webcomic for ND's art school so he could practice her art daily, and they never expected it would get as big as it did, and to me, that makes nimona even cooler. nimona is so magical to me bc it's personal. and i think it's really cool that we're finally getting it in film form! and i don't understand why nimona getting a film is making so many people mad.

anyway. [points at the sign that says, "a queer person expressing their personal journey through art isn't always going to portray YOUR preferred version of the queer experience bc we're all unique people and someone figuring out their identity isn't always going to be a neat and tidy process"] ty and goodnight.

[attackfish]

"Zuko is a dweeby little turtleduck"

As some of you may know, especially if you've been around me for a while, especially if you knew me in my Livejournal days, I've got a complicated relationship with the hurt/comfort genre. In theory, the genre hits pretty much all of my narrative kinks. I write a lot about abuse, trauma, recovery, finding or not finding love and support, and just the general range of terrible things happening to my favorite characters, and/or the aftermath. I should love hurt/comfort, right? I should eat it up with a spoon. Right?

And some of it l do. But a lot of the genre, and the attitudes and assumptions baked into a lot of the genre, really sets my teeth on edge. Some of this is the structural limitations of the genre. Hurt/comfort as a genre typically begins with the hurt, unless the hurt is something that happens in canon, and then it's just quickly summarized. but either way the point of the hurt is the comfort. It's about the setup and release of narrative tension, the problem of the hurt, the solution of the comfort. This hurt can be physical, emotional, or both, and can be as simple as a character with a minor injury or the flu, to a character experiencing permanent disability and/or life-altering trauma. There is nothing wrong with this format, in the sense that it is a satisfying narrative format, with a satisfying build and release of tension, but it doesn't really fit well with portraying trauma in a realistic way.

Which makes sense, because the genre tends towards wish fulfillment rather than realism. To be clear, there's nothing wrong with that, but I think my wishes tend to be a bit misaligned with a lot of people with regards to the portrayal of trauma.

Trauma is deeply isolating, and the more isolated you are to start with, the less social power you have, the fewer people who will come to your defense, the more likely you are to be traumatized, to be victimized, to be hurt. And of course if you don't have a lot of social resources to draw on to start with, once you've been victimized it's really hard to build them, and it is much more likely that you will not find support in your pain. In this, I was extremely lucky. Yes I was abused as a child, and yes in some ways I was isolated, but I was abused outside the home, by people who weren't my close family, and I had a loving, supportive family who did everything they could to help me through. Sure, the world outside my family didn't believe or trust me, and didn't care about supporting me, but I had people who cared about me, and who were ready to walk through fire for me. Many if not most people who experience childhood trauma experience it within the home, and don't have that good fortune that I did.

But because of my good fortune, because I always had people supporting me and helping me and loving me, I don't really go looking for narratives where a character identify with is being supported through their trauma, and this makes them better, or heaven forbid, heals them and takes the trauma away. I was loved and supported, and this made it possible for me to recover in the ways I have, but it was still a long and really ugly road, and nobody could heal my trauma for me. I still had to put in a shit ton of work. So instead of functioning as wish fulfillment for me, I find those narratives alienating.

There are a lot of very nuanced stories in the hurt/comfort genre that don't fall into that, and who's build and cathartic release of tension tends to be less neat, and the endings tend to be less unequivocally happy. And I don't actually think that the wish fulfillment stories are inherently bad, since for people who didn't get lots of love and support initially, it's kind of a way of writing yourself getting that support, of writing what you wished happened, and that is good and healing and healthy and reading that is also good in healing and healthy for many people. Realism is not always what you need or want, sometimes wish fulfillment is good. I am simply pointing out a common pattern and why it doesn't work for me.

But there is a much less benign reason a lot of hurt/comfort makes me want to scream, and this is the way victims in hurt/comfort tend to be portrayed.

The very first story that I actually gave up on writing was in the Harry Potter fandom. It was a story about if when Sirius told snape how to find Remus as a werewolf, Snape had been bitten. In this process, not only did Snape become a werewolf, but he was also permanently physically disabled. Part of the reason I stopped writing this fanfic was because I had Marauders fans versus Snape fans in my inbox constantly, each insisting I was being unfair to their favorite characters, because I was writing them all as assholes (which to be clear, they are), but an equally large part of why I ended up dropping the fic and deleting it, was because of how many people were angry or puzzled by the fact that I was writing disabled teenage Snape as just as angry and snarky and nasty as he was in the books, because being made disabled should have softened him, right?

I'm physically disabled, and I was kind of horrified by how many people insisted that because of a physical disability, Snape, or indeed any character, or worse any real person, should suddenly become a different person with a different personality. Not only is that not how it works, but that expectation is rank ableism. I couldn't deal with this attitude as a writer, and certainly not a decade ago when I was much younger. These comments made me angry, but they also killed my joy for the story.

I come across this attitude in explicit form much less often now in fandom, at least when it comes to physical disability. But it hasn't entirely gone away, and the place where subjecting a character to misery is still a mostly socially acceptable way to make them soft and approachable, is with emotional trauma. This is the reflection of broad cultural attitudes towards disability, mental illness, trauma, gender, Christian ideas about suffering, I mean there are a lot of things that go into this strange idea that trauma makes somebody nicer and sweeter. But it's bullshit, as anybody who has had to deal with anyone who has been traumatized, or who has been traumatized themselves, knows full well. Trauma doesn't make you stronger, but it does usually make you less, not more approachable, less, not more sweet.

I like to write, and read, about what society judges as bad victims, people who react to trauma in the ways that actual people react to trauma, with maladaptive coping mechanisms, fear, anger, suspicion, self sabotage, lashing out, manipulation, attempts to control others, or drive them away, all the things that people do when they're in pain and afraid. It's never pretty, and it almost always ends with even more pain. I like to read and write about people going through trauma, or in the aftermath of traumatic happenings, who struggle, and fail, and who might have help and support but ultimately have to do the work and make the choices to move their lives forward. And a lot of times, I write about people who have been traumatized lashing out at, or otherwise hurting, the people trying to support them. That's what I find validating: watching their pain acknowledged and respected, even when they're not doing anything right yet, and watching them get through it, even though nobody wants to wrap them in a blanket, or if someone does, it doesn't fix anything.

So why did I title this long post about my relationship to hurt/comfort and depictions of trauma after the tag I use for Zuko? Two reasons. The first is that Avatar: the Last Airbender is full of stellar depictions of traumatized characters, who are all afraid and hurting, and sometimes hurting each other, learning and growing, in many different ways. Zuko is a stand out example of this. His abuse at the hands of his father, his banishment, and his constant anxiety and humiliation at the hands of officers like Zhao, have left him anxious, angry, prone to lashing out, and the kind of prideful that only comes out of a deep sense of shame, and fear of being humiliated and disregarded. He is, well, the audience, including me, loves him, but he's clearly deeply unpleasant to be around in universe. He is constantly making everything worse for himself and everybody around him, while trying to keep his head above water.

And then, as the icing on the cake, he's got his uncle. His uncle, who loves and supports him. His uncle, who would give almost anything to be able to make Zuko see that what his father did to him is wrong, to make him see that the war is wrong, that capturing the Avatar is wrong, to love him into healing and making better choices. Iroh would love to do that. Iroh can't do that. Only Zuko can change Zuko. And of course, it's Iroh who takes the brunt of so much of Zuko's frankly appalling, if entirely understandable and deeply compelling, behavior. Zuko is an open festering wound, and Iroh is constantly getting sprayed with pus.

And I love it.

But of course, Zuko is very obviously deeply traumatized, and as I mentioned, that trauma is deeply compelling, and he is beloved by the audience. So of course, there is going to be a lot of hurt/comfort fic featuring him as the hurt and comforted character. This is all well and good. It's entirely natural. However, because there is a lot of hurt/comfort focused on Zuko, there is also a lot of hurt/comfort content that contains those basic assumptions about trauma and suffering that would mean that a character who is traumatized is made somehow nicer, or sweeter. Zuko in canon is not very nice, not very sweet, and not very approachable, so to fit him in with this view of trauma and suffering, he needs to be made nicer, needs to be softened and sweetened and made more palatable. Zuko in these fan works is a soft creature, who shuts down or cries, or has some other softer response to trauma, rather than yells, lashes out, and grows angry and suspicious, like Zuko does in canon. In short, Zuko is made into a "good victim."

And I hate it.

So the reason I titled this essay after my tag for Zuko is that I have seen this phenomenon dubbed the awkward turtleduck Zuko or the dweeby turtleduck Zuko phenomenon. And at least one person has actually blocked me because of my Zuko is a dweeby turtleduck tag, which I presume caused them to assume that I write this kind of softened Zuko content. Which is of course not true, anyone who's actually read my fanworks is well aware that my characterization of Zuko is the shouty, angry king of lashing out at the people trying to help him, and making everything worse for himself. But I feel like I should address some confusion here, especially since part of me, hopefully a part of me that thinks I have more influence in this fandom than I do, is worried that perhaps my language on the subject might be a contributing factor to the name of this phenomenon.

So why is this my Zuko tag? Because I have been on Tumblr since 2012, and that's when I chose this tag, and the Avatar fandom back then was a very different place. Softboy Zuko was not the obnoxious bad characterization of him that was most prominent. Back then the characterization that I kept seeing over and over again that made me want to roll my eyes and hide under a rock, was perfect super zuko, who could do no wrong and could do everything and was better than all of the other characters and was so cool and so perfect and just like really really cool, guys. Super Zuko showed up a lot in ship fic, but he was hardly exclusive to it, and he came in different flavors, the ship fic version tending to be sexy broody Zuko who needed to be healed by the chosen love interest, while genfic super Zuko tended to just be so much cooler than everybody else. This showed up everywhere constantly and I hated it so much. It's a complete misunderstanding of Zuko's character, and the point of his character, just as softboy Zuko is. And my response was, oh no no no Zuko is not cool. he is so uncool. When he took a social and emotional intelligence test, the score came back negative. Zuko is the opposite of cool. He's a fucking dweeb. I love him, he's a dweebly little turtleduck.

And that's the story of my Zuko is a dweeby little turtleduck tag.

[variousqueerthings]

hi it’s almost september which means it’s almost october and given that the horror genre sort of belongs to queer people (it’s a complicated relationship i’ll admit), i’m weirdly anxious to know your opinion about this: in terms of Monster Movies™️, where does samtory fit? like, a movie where it’s only One sort of monster and only one of the pair is monstrous—vampire, witch, zombie, ghost, or werewolf?? i’m leaning towards werewolf bc i think Sam and that guy in American Werewolf in London are the same sort of innocent-sweet-internally-monstrous but i genuinely can’t make up my mind about it. so im politely requesting your mind, pls! and it’s various opinions! what do you think is the lanichols monster movie? also what’s ur fav horror movie, i must know.

W E L L O K ! ! ! ! ! HELLO GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU! (you come into MY house, you ask me a question that makes ME feral, on the months counting down to this Halloween that I’ve been longingly thinking of since... last Halloween)

Funny you should ask, I have ahem... too many words... perhaps...

EDIT: yes too many words!

Also before you read all of that -- can I send these questions right back atcha?

This thing I wrote last year for CKHalloween which was a tad more cannibalism, but was actually inspired by This idea and then -- then it evolved into this, which is still not technically finished but also exists as a neat little one-shot

So I think it’s safe to say that I am onboard the Werewolf Is A Metaphor For Incorrect Girlhood Is Sexy And Hairy And Lusts Unabashedly And Unashamedly monster metaphor

Now these were all last year, when I was very much hyperfixating on Tory’s anger (and hunger), whereas in the run-up to this season I’ve been very much reading and thinking about Sam’s inner Incorrectedness -- partly your Words, partly that dreamscape fight, partly the events of season 4, partly just... the feeling of what her journey has been (embracing that part of herself -- the lesbianism lycanthropy)

As for the LaNichols Monster Movie, it’s crazy I haven’t really thought about it at all. I made a watchlist for this year’s Halloween-theme (I won’t manage all of these) "the monstrous feminine,” so I’ve taken a moment to peruse through it for the actual full-on monsters (so not cannibals and murderers and the insane) and here’s my journey:

1. you really notice how rarely a woman is allowed to just be ugly and unhinged. you know. not sexy monster, but just fucking growing all the bits and tearing into people

2. I was tempted to immediately look at those “are these girls gay for each other or do they hate each other” movies (Jennifer’s Body, The Craft, Interview With A Vampire, etc)

3. I have another list which is about queer halloween movies, which opened up the board a bit more, however I was pretty keen on not removing the fact that they are Girls from the equation (so not inserting them into a narrative that features boys, ex. lost boys or the like, which you obviously can, but I decided to try to be Focused) and I got to thinking about a couple of films

(I acknowledge at this point that I could have made this answer shorter, but I’m not great at that, secondly that there are older movies on my list that I haven’t watched yet, like “Cat People,” and lastly I do think I have a contender for “the” movie, but I think it’s dependent on what Feeling we’re giving Tory and Sam)

The Lure: Polish punk musical horror movie about two mermaids who start performing at a club. One of them embraces her (explicitly queer) monsterhood, while the other starts to try to conform to a (heavily coded) heteronormative humanness. Their “fights” with one another are based in fear and love more explicitly than some of the cattier it’s-gay-but-they’re-bitchy-about-it movies (and I say this with love, I love catty petty queers in horror). I also like that there’s so much more tragedy inherent in their choices and that it’s a rare “maybe to be human was not the right choice” -- I say rare, of course this is becoming an eeever so gradually more common narrative

I also like the ongoing theme of queering chivalry feels... strong in this one. (also without spoilers: eating his heart in the marketplace)

some runner ups were: Thelma (repressive lesbianism symbolised through psychokinetic powers that burst through and cause a bunch of Trouble as she tries to deny that she’s into girls), Us (the idea of your mirror/other and the themes of poverty and the structural violence forced on others coming back to haunt you + obsession with the girl who reminds you of yourself + I sometimes think if Daniel had remained a mechanic or a dealer and his family had never been well-off and how that would have changed Sam and her relationship to Tory in terms of class -- I know they’re not “technically” monsters, but the world is very differently structured so I slipped it through) and the obvious Ginger Snaps (because *waves at everything that is Ginger Snaps*)

Also favourite horror uhhhhhh -- I think in terms of genre I love body horror/transformations so much (speaking of complicated relationships). I love the obvious Inevitable Change, but also the Choice To Change (and accepting the consequences of your actions) because often it IS a choice (and sometimes it’s not a choice and in either case it’s a+++), the alienation of ones own body and other bodies as collateral, the freedom of embracing the monstrous, and the pain of negating it -- I think I love it more as a Potential even, than what it currently entails, because it still carries the ending of “and then you have to die (but you may die loved)” and I’d like for monstrousness to be explored beyond death as it, again, more gradually is, and to be fair also is in some classics --  having written all of this: Hellraiser. Sexiest movie ever made, not technically the transformational type, but also... kinda...  also again, consequences of choices, and informed consent (how can you own the consequences if you weren’t given the freedom to consent)? I feel a lot of that these days both with the fuckery around reproductive rights and the fuckery of gender affirmation rights#

and you know... sexy kink

Also three movies I haven’t seen yet that I desperately want to: Possessor (it seems like a worthy ongoing Chronenberg exploration, this time the son -- think speaking of body horror...), Mad God (that Phil Tippet 30 year stop motion project!!!) and Monsterdyke (dyke and monster fuck... that could also be Sam and Tory, but who’s who?)

That’s where I’m at with all of that, thank you for bearing with the ramble if you’ve stayed this far ❤

[justanotherhh]

their shared experience of boundary violation and entirely-different-yet-oddly similar ways of dealing with it, in the sense that they keep everyone at arms length (although angel's truth is closer to the surface)

different mask, same intention -- and for both of them there can be a subtle shift between what is considered charming or desirable, and what is off-putting and uncomfortable within the exact same moment. angel's flirting crossing a line that keeps people away or draws them closer as he wants, alastor's southern charm reading as sincere or threatening with just a shift of demeanour...

both performers inherently

and putting aside my favourite little headcanon -- that angel is also asexual, but on the hypersexual side of things -- both of them have specific relationships to sex that aren't common even in the world they're in, and could be considered on a meta-level as difficult for people to understand for being on extreme ends of a spectrum -- angel as hypersexual, alastor as repulsed, the instinct seems to be that these are dehumanising and need to be "fixed" by finding the right (monogamous romantic sexual) relationship for them

whether this will become canon within the show as well, there are already certain codings: vaggie's reaction to angel taking them to a bdsm club and the ideas that "being saved" is equated as having the correct relationship to when to have sex (after marriage) even as a semi-joke. i would actually really like if angel doesn't necessarily "discover" that he needs vanilla monogamous sex, but that it's perhaps more complicated than that, which loser baby does give a few neat little hints of (husk accepting him as he is)

and on alastor's side the simple fact that the story is so defined by romantic relationships, with himself and niffty the sole main characters so far not with a romantic relationship (and niffty is definitely a sexual person, so that makes him the only one who's not got that written for him either -- the closest to a romantic/sexual dynamic that alastor has is vox, and it's defined by alastor's turning him down and vox's one-sided obsession), and so that defining him as having an outsider status within the hotel itself

it would be interesting if there was a story of his disinterest in these things as something that unnerves characters who think these are "saving" traits, and try to put those ideals onto him, before unlearning their own biases -- slightly similar to what happened to some extent for angel in s1, when they realised that nothing was technically against his being in heaven, but not necessarily about redeeming him (here, I think alastor differs from most of the other residents... he's not looking for redemption, at least not with the current data we have)

the idea that angel and alastor could be potential thematic proofs of how complicated/non-normative relationships with romance and sex are considered judgement-worthy in and of themselves in a story about deconstructing easy dichotomies of "good" and "bad by focusing on queer characters, and whether that could be a textual link that the story makes that potentially potentially (Potentially) has them forming a narrative bond that they may not technically even understand or have the terminology for, but simply works, strangely, to an outside eye that thinks they're irreconcilably different

othered characters in a story that's already about othered characters, finding a commonality in their intense otherness

and performance

in my heart and soul. angel and alastor are going to be unlikely friends. two sides of a thematic coin that nobody intended for me the audience-member to fixate on, because im reading into a potential rather than a definite. but. in my heart and soul.